The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding, misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant merely believed and unreasonable promise to expand the sales store L of the I Honorary Chairperson L, while running a business for the supply of softs, and Q (hereinafter “victim”).

It shall not be settled and paid at the time, but it shall not have been intended to obtain money from the beginning.

2) There was no fact that the amount of excavation costs was paid from the injured party on the date set forth in Nos. 20, 21, and 23 of the List of Crimes Attached to the lower judgment.

The Defendant settled the part of the amount of softened to the victim, and returned the amount of 20 million won to the victim, and the amount of the total amount of softened to be paid is KRW 88,845,00 (the amount of supply KRW 156,738,00,000).

B. The punishment of the lower court is heavy.

2. Determination

A. The following facts and circumstances are acknowledged in full view of the evidence examined by the lower court as a whole, misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal doctrine.

The fact that the defendant acquired the amount of the excavation cost from the damaged person as stated in the facts charged can be recognized based on it.

① From around 2011, the Defendant became aware of the I representative L in the process of engaging in fishery products distribution business under the name of “J”.

The Defendant shall be in charge of the production and wholesale of H from around August 201 to around 1 and H (representative R), “H shall be in charge of the production and wholesale of h, and the J shall be in charge of the sale, and I shall ensure that the Defendant is in charge of the supply of c0 billion won of c0 billion won by securing the distribution network of a lot.

'' has entered into an agreement between three parties with the content.

② The Defendant received excavation expenses from H from May 2012 to September 2013 in accordance with the foregoing Convention, and received from H from around 2013, and supplied the amount of excavation expenses to H in the name of the hotel in Seoul and six lot lots (the river, subdivision, Incheon Samsan, Haak-ju, Gyeonggi-si, and Jeonbuk-gu Eup). However, the Defendant continued to pay the amount of excavation expenses to H.

In the end, around September 2013, H withdraws from the third party agreement and suspended transactions with the defendant, and at the time the defendant was not paid to H.