The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The judgment of the court below which recognized the establishment of a crime of fraud against the defendant, although the defendant did not have any intention to commit the crime of defraudation of the summary of the grounds for appeal.

2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s determination that recognized the establishment of fraud against the Defendant is justifiable, and it does not seem that there was an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts as alleged by the Defendant.

① According to the witness B and H’s statement at each court below’s court below’s court hearing, it is recognized that the Defendant stated that at the time of borrowing money from the victim, the Defendant would use all the borrowed money as a daily operating fund, and would repay the money with profits by continuing the operation of the daily house.

However, the defendant thought that he would dispose of a house due to the aggravation of business management, and used the money borrowed from the victim to pay the debt to other creditors.

(2) At the time of the instant case, the Defendant not only operated the daily house but also engaged in credit business, but also was not recovered from the debtor, and the Defendant was also liable for the debt amounting to KRW 90 million, and was also in a bad credit standing position. (3) At the time of the instant case, the Defendant was also in a position of having been in a bad credit standing.

Therefore, the defendant did not have an economic ability to repay the money borrowed from the victim within three months as he/she promised.

③ As above, the Defendant notified the victim of false details or concealed such facts with respect to his/her economic condition and the location of the money borrowed from the victim.