The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant did not deceiving the victim (the Defendant only received some amount of 300 million won upon the Defendant’s request in cash if it is urgently needed for the expansion of the facilities, and there was no fact that the Defendant provided the victim with a promissory note in an amount equivalent to KRW 300 million, and that the Defendant borrowed 4 copies of the promissory note as collateral because it is urgently required to use the funds, and there was no intention or ability to borrow money). The Defendant had no intention or capacity to repay at the time, and thus, had

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the defendant by misunderstanding the facts.

B. Even if the defendant is found guilty, the lower court’s sentencing (6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① F, the victim company operated by the investigation agency and I upon request from the J and I to the court of original trial, and the defendant met the defendant. The defendant delivered KRW 85,500,000 to the defendant's account "the defendant has consistently stated to the purport, ② the I consistently stated to the purport, ② the defendant was asked to inquire about the place where the bill can be discounted by J from the court of original trial, and it was necessary to receive money from F to expand the victim's facilities, so that it was requested to inquire about the place where the bill can be borrowed, but the defendant was paid the amount to the defendant's account to the effect that "the defendant was paid the amount to the defendant's account to the effect that it was not a 2-3-3-3-3-day account from the date of delivery of the bill of this case."

such assertion, but it can be explained.