The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court found all of the charges of the instant case guilty: (a) the lower court found the Defendant guilty as to each of the charges of the instant case; (b) found the Defendant not guilty as to the primary charge (the charge of embezzlement) in relation to the instant case; and (c) found the Defendant guilty as to the conjunctive charge (the charge of fraud), and only the Defendant appealed against the lower judgment.

In such cases, the aforementioned [2018 High Court Order 18] The portion of innocence as to the primary facts charged in the case shall be judged in the trial of the party, but the part of acquittal as to the primary facts charged in the case shall be exempted from the object of attack and defense between the parties, and in fact, leave the object of trial. Thus, the conclusion of the lower judgment is to be followed and the decision shall not be

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. Fact-finding is true that the Defendant, on May 27, 2016, transferred KRW 30 million from the victim company (representative director F) to the Defendant.

However, at the time, the Defendant did not request the F to pay part of the instant construction design expenses, and rather, did not request F to provide financial support by explaining the circumstances of the F difficult company at the time. Therefore, the Defendant did not deceiving the part of the victim company as above, and the scope of defraudation related thereto cannot be recognized.

Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the lower court of this part of the facts charged (2018 order 18) (the ancillary facts charged in the instant case). In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal, but the lower court, taking into account the following circumstances acknowledged by the records of this case, by deceiving F, a representative of the victim company as stated in this part of the facts charged, thereby inducing the Defendant to do so.