The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding or misapprehension of legal principles that the Defendant borrowed money from the bond company to the victim.

It is reasonable for the defendant to receive the borrowed money as the repayment of bonds, but there is no relation between the defendant's use and the victim's payment of money.

The defendant did not set the maturity of the above loan at the end of April 2016.

The defendant did not have the intention to acquire the above money because he had the intent and ability to repay it.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty on the basis of the victim's statement without credibility. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Unless there are exceptional cases where maintaining the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance trial is deemed remarkably unfair, the appellate court shall not arbitrarily reverse the first instance judgment on the ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance trial is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006, etc.). 2) In light of the above legal principles, the lower court convicted him of the facts charged in this case by taking into account the detailed circumstances in its reasoning.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of facts or the misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. Circumstances favorable to the Defendant regarding unfair determination of sentencing are as follows.

The defendant.