The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The lower court rejected an application for compensation order filed by an applicant for compensation, recognizing that all of the facts charged in the instant case is guilty.

According to Article 32 (4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, an applicant for compensation is unable to file an appeal against a trial that rejected an application for a compensation order. Therefore, the rejection part of the application for the above compensation order was immediately finalized.

Therefore, the rejection of an application for compensation order among the judgment of the court below is excluded from the scope of this court.

misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles as to the summary of the grounds for appeal [the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud)] Defendant will engage in gift certificate business to the victim.

There was no fraud by deception, and the victim was aware that he is engaged in the economic situation of the defendant or corporate bonds, and the defendant was in charge of money, and the victim demanded the return of the investment money due to the infertility of the married child.

In addition, the victim’s statement is not consistent, and it is presumed that the victim’s text message is false in order to receive funds from the damaged party. The Defendant’s use of the money received from the damaged party as investment in the Busan Port Authority, rather than bond business. Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the probative value of evidence and misapprehending the legal doctrine on the admissibility of evidence, based on victim’s statement and text message.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake and misunderstanding of the legal principles also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the court below stated the legal principles on the intent of unlawful acquisition or the intent of the crime of deception in fraud, and duly adopted and investigated the following facts and circumstances.