The judgment below

Of them, the part of the 2017 Highest 896 case shall be reversed.

Defendant 2, 2017 High Order 896 Case No. 2, 3.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the fraud in the facts charged in the 2017 High Order 896 case as stated in the lower judgment, the Defendant had an intention to transfer the “D” business to the victim E, but the Defendant did not transfer the business after receiving a part of the business transfer proceeds, and the contract with the victim was reversed, and the transferee again transferred the D business to F after the termination of the contract, so the Defendant did not have any criminal intent to commit fraud and deceiving the victim. Therefore, there is no fact that the Defendant had no criminal intent to commit fraud.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. As to the 2017 High Order 1282 case, the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of the misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles of the 2017 High Order 896 Case as to the judgment of the court below is based on the point at the time of borrowing the loan. Therefore, if the defendant had the intent and ability to repay at the time of borrowing, he/she could not thereafter repay the loan.

Even if this is merely a mere non-performance of civil liability, it cannot be said that criminal fraud is established. Meanwhile, the existence of the criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances such as the defendant's financial history before and after the crime, environment, contents of the crime, the process of transaction, the relationship with the victim, etc., unless the defendant confessions (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do3034, Mar. 26, 1996). 2) The court below and the court below duly adopted and examined the following facts and circumstances, which are recognized in accordance with the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below.