The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant used a business to export water to Japan, and the victim was well aware of the Defendant’s business contents, and voluntarily lent money by predicting the proceeds of the business, and the Defendant is close to the receipt of an investment from the victim.

While the Defendant actually is running the water export business, the owner of the water was unable to pay the money to the victim because of the wind that the owner of the water has exceeded the business right to a third party, and does not have any intent and ability to pay the money from the beginning.

B. The lower court’s sentence on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. On September 2, 2010, the lower court acknowledged the assertion of mistake of facts as follows: (i) the victim agreed that the Defendant would pay the money to the Defendant for the business of exporting water to Japan on or around September 2, 2010, as soon as it is necessary; (ii)

At any time, the project must be well known, inside, and outside, and at any time be repaid, the loan certificate was received in the year 2015;

In judging the office once more than two years after the first lending of money, there was no number of books, and there was no employee;

Until now preparation has been made, it would be able to purchase a book so that it can ice office, and flive 1.8 million won by card;

In the first time, no office cost was required to carry out water export business, and later, Japan lent money to require expenses, such as where no money was paid or no money was paid to anyone to enter into a hotel.

There was no document that the Defendant had directly shown that the Defendant had been operating the horse;

If the defendant has been a three-year period, his business will be well.