The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was unaware of the fact that he did not deceiving the victims to preserve the principal of the investment, and used the investment money received from the victims for the distribution business in China for the sake of the local distribution business in China, and did not have any profit to the victims and did not have any intention to acquire the investment money, but the lower court convicted the victims by misunderstanding the fact.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the agreement that the defendant prepared with the victims, stating that "the settlement of the above investment shall be made on a six-month basis, and in special circumstances, it shall be made on a one-year basis through each agreement; however, there is no fact that the defendant made the settlement of the accounts after receiving the money from the victims; and the above agreement states that "the investment profits for the above investment shall be based on an annual rate of 100% of the corporate growth base, and the principal of the investment with Gap (the victims) shall be preserved in principle even in the case of a company's non-growth." However, if the amount the victims delivered to the defendant was purely invested, the profit and loss distribution rate between the defendant and the victims shall be set in the agreement, but such content shall be returned without delay, and the defendant shall return the principal to the victims.

The defendant did not explain to the victims, even though he/she has returned the amount of eight million won out of the date he/she received money from the victims to his/her spouse's account and has repaid his/her spouse's loans.