The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the defendant had intent to repay the amount of KRW 40 million from the victim at the time of borrowing the money from the victim, and the defendant's act is also sufficient to have the ability to repay, the crime of fraud is not established.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the first instance court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts were duly adopted and investigated: (i) around March 1, 2006, the Defendant leased 200 million won (F and G) totaling the deposit amount of KRW 200 million, and monthly rent of KRW 500,000,000,000; (ii) the remainder of KRW 100,000,000,000 out of the deposit amount of the two stores located in the above clothing store was suspended due to shortage of money, and the Defendant paid interest corresponding thereto (Evidence 81,82) on behalf of the Defendant’s wife (Evidence evidence record). (iii) Around that time, the Defendant’s wife owned an apartment building of KRW 50,60,000,000 to the KGJ, but the Defendant was already subject to a loan of KRW 348,000,000,000,000,000.

(30 pages of the trial records) Meanwhile, the Defendant was bearing the interest rate of 4% per month for the above H (31,162 of the trial records, page 2 of the evidence records, page 82 of the trial records), and ③ As such, even if the interest that the Defendant has to pay every month is required, it is substituted by monthly tax and unpaid security deposit.