The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts [Fraud (the point of fraud)] The Defendant had an intent to normally perform the construction work on the ground research institute in the response population M 2803 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) at the time of allowing the victim’s L ownership. However, it is only limited to the fact that the victim requested to issue a performance guarantee insurance policy of an unreasonable amount, consented to the creation of a collateral security right on the instant land, and did not perform the construction work on the ground of the victim’s change, such as demanding termination even if the victim consented to the creation of a collateral security right on the instant land, and did not intend to obtain the maximum debt amount equivalent to 30 million won from the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found this part of the facts charged guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of the assertion of mistake of facts 1) The criminal intent of deceitation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, of the relevant legal principles, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of transaction before and after the crime unless the Defendant makes a confession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Do424, Apr. 25, 1995). Meanwhile, the Defendant’s confession in the court of first instance cannot be said to be doubtful of the probative value or credibility of the confession solely on the grounds that the confession in the court of first instance differs from his/her legal statement in the appellate court. In determining the credibility of the confession, the credibility of the confession shall be determined by lawfully taking into account (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do2526, Apr. 29, 2010).