The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is H that led to the instant fraud, and the Defendant made an investment in H.

The Defendant did not have made a statement to the victims that “if he invests in money in the Llurt Project, he would give profits.”

On the other hand, H only operates funds.

In the end, the project will not be implemented.

Accordingly, the defendant invested about 17 million won in the remaining investment fund in the coiner, etc. by mutual consent with the victims, and was not paid the investment fund from the beginning.

Therefore, the defendant did not have the intention of fraud, and there is no fact that there was a deception.

2. In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, it is recognized that the defendant deceivings the victims as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below and acquired money.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit. A.

The victims testified in the court of the court below to the effect that "the defendant did not provide an explanation on the Yellow project in the form of a lecture, and that if the defendant invests in the lux project on the food site, etc., he would make a monthly profit equivalent to 15% per month," and that "the defendant was aware of the fact that the defendant invested the investment in the coin, etc." was later known.

In addition, the victims made a detailed statement about the investment explained by the defendant at the time of the police investigation.

B. The Defendant denied the instant facts charged by the third trial date of the lower court, but the victims testified as above on the third trial date and recognized all the facts charged on the fourth trial date.

C. H testified in the court below’s testimony to the effect that “The Defendant is the Defendant. However, the Defendant was unable to invest the investment funds received from the victims in the Yellow Project, and used them for other purposes.”

The Defendant is H.