The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant had no capacity to repay the money borrowed from the victim as in the instant facts charged, the Defendant was aware of the fact by deceiving the victim as in the instant facts charged. However, by borrowing KRW 160 million from the victim, the Defendant merely deducted the amount of KRW 25 million from the victim and actually received KRW 130 million from the victim. Furthermore, the Defendant prepared a loan certificate to the effect that he/she repaid the victim a sum of KRW 70 million as the principal and interest, and borrowed only the remainder of KRW 90 million, which is 90 million, the amount acquired by the Defendant should be recognized as KRW 90,000,000,000,000.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. In the first instance trial, the Prosecutor filed an application for changes in the Bill of Indictment with respect to Paragraph 2 of the instant facts charged (the acquired money from October 8, 201 to February 24, 201) as stated below, and since this Court permitted this and changed the subject of the judgment, the lower judgment was no longer maintained in this respect.

[Revised charges] Around October 2011, the Defendant stated that “When a person engaged in mincing funeral sells mincing, he/she intends to lend money to a mincing funeral because there exist many profits when he/she sells mincing. When lending money, he/she would immediately repay money to another person in the mincing funeral.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not think that he will lend money to a person carrying out mining funeral, but did not intend to lend money to another person in need of money, such as money for a number of days business, to receive interest, and the defendant did not have an intention or ability to lend money to the victim if the F et al. is unable to pay the money due to the lack of any particular income

As such, the Defendant deceivings the victim, and thereby deceivings the victim, KRW 7.5 million from the victim on October 8, 201.