beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The amount under paragraph (1) of the charge of mistake of facts is not a loan, but an investment money, and the amount under paragraphs (2) through (4) of the charge was willing to repay to the defendant at the time of borrowing the money, and the court below convicted the defendant by misunderstanding the fact.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of suspended execution in October and one hundred and twenty hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. On September 17, 2010, the Defendant received KRW 10 million from the victim on August 19, 2010 and remitted KRW 1 million to the victim on September 17, 2010, which was after the month when the Defendant got approximately KRW 10 million from the victim on August 19, 2010 (in title 21, title 1 of the Investigation Record), the Defendant recognized that the Defendant was the borrowed money (in addition, KRW 50 million was also about August 24, 201, and then remitted KRW 3 million to the victim on September 20, 201, which was September 20, 201.
(No. 22 of the Investigation Record No. 1). The victim stated “A loan” at the time of withdrawing KRW 5 million on April 6, 201 through the Internet (No. 2 of the Investigation Record No. 17). The defendant did not mention the investment even at the time of sending e-mail requesting additional money on August 22, 2011. Rather, if the victim borrowed additional KRW 50 million on the premise that he/she is a loan, it would be able to repay KRW 79 million from September 201 to April 2012 (No. 25 of the Investigation Record No. 25 of the Investigation Record), and the defendant prepared as of September 5, 2013 to the effect that it is sufficient to recognize that he/she is not mentioned in paragraph 27(1) of the Investigation Record No. 27 of the instant case.
[Additionally, the Defendant stated that “The Defendant shall pay all the investments even if they are invested” by the police (in addition, the concept of “investment” claimed by the Defendant, in light of the first right and twenty-seven pages of investigation records, and in light of this, the concept of “investment” asserted by the Defendant.