The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

except that this judgment.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

1) A person who borrows KRW 20 million from the victim D on January 11, 2010, from the victim D, on or around January 11, 2010, is not the defendant, but her husband G (the crime No. 1 of the original judgment). The amount that the victim D and C transferred or delivered on August 2010 and September 201 by the victim D and C, not the amount borrowed from the defendant, but the defendant operated, I (hereinafter “I”).

(A) is an investment in the Fund (as of the first instance judgment 2-A).

paragraphs 1 and 2.

2,348,300 won, which the victims remitted to the members of the I on October 2010, was paid to the staff of the I from the I’s profits, and 2,200,300 won, which was remitted to the J, was paid at the attorney’s expense under an agreement to file an application for commencing rehabilitation procedures with the Defendant and I, and the Defendant did not receive 5,100,000 won from the victims (Article 2-C of the original decision).

As to the crime of subsection 1, the above arguments are referred to as "first argument".

A) The Defendant did not have any obligation to pay KRW 80 million or to avoid returning (as to each of the crimes indicated in the judgment of the lower court, the Defendant’s assertion as to each of the crimes is “second assertion.”

(2) The lower court’s sentencing (one year of imprisonment) on the ground of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

1) Public prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts (the acquitted part of the defendant was not guilty of KRW 19 million from the victim C on November 2009, which was offered as security at the time of borrowing KRW 20 million, but the defendant actually belonged to the victim about KRW 40 million, and considering the possibility that the rent in arrears will be deducted in the future, the above claim for the refund of the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million cannot be deemed to have been sufficiently offered as security for the above loan, and therefore, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant had criminal intent to commit fraud at the time.

In addition, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay to the defendant at the time when he borrowed KRW 9.5 million from the victim C on December 2009 in light of the I's financial status and the obligation relationship of the defendant.