The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. A person who has decided to make an investment in the Defendant’s Indonesia E business (hereinafter “instant business”) by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding legal principles is not the victim, and thus, the Defendant does not directly deceive the victim.

In addition, due to the amendment of the Indonesia Mining Law, the project has not run properly, and it is not possible to return the investment money to the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

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

2. Determination

A. As to the facts charged in this case, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the ground that, even if the Defendant’s assertion in the investigation agency and court was fully acknowledged, it was difficult to establish a factory within the period agreed by the victim at the time to make profits or to repay the amount of investment money, and that no objective data can be found to support the Defendant’s assertion.

2) In addition to the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant deceivings the victim and 300 million won.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty does not err by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles.

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

① The victim stated consistently at the investigation stage to the effect that “the Defendant has made an investment by showing data related to the business to the victim and explaining the business” (see, e.g., evidence recording 65 pages), and the Defendant also explained the business to the victim while showing data on the business of E., once the victim considered and contacted.