The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Defendant

The summary of the Reasons for Appeal by the defense counsel is that the defendant used the money borrowed from the victim E for the purpose of notifying the victim of the fact, and E was well aware of the circumstances that the defendant had difficulties in the operation of the chickens, and the defendant was able to receive the money if the circumstances of the defendant were not determined.

Therefore, the defendant did not deceiving E and did not have any intention to deception.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, thereby misunderstanding the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

In light of the following: (a) the Defendant was under difficulties in the management of cryptives due to the reduction of unfair sentencing, and the Defendant borrowed money from the victim; and (b) the victim expressed his intent not to want the Defendant’s punishment; (c) the Defendant repaid approximately KRW 1,700,00 per month as agreed with the victim; and (d) the Defendant has no record of punishment either for the same crime or for a fine exceeding the fine, the lower court’s sentence that sentenced six months to imprisonment is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The defendant in the judgment of the court below also argued the same purport as the argument in the grounds of appeal, and the court below rejected the defendant's argument and found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case.

The circumstances and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, the Defendant, under an investigation by an investigative agency, stated that “the Defendant borrowed money from the victim at the same time as “the victim would have repaid the money,” but in relation to the method of payment, “the Defendant borrowed KRW 56 million from the victim to pay the amount of money,” and “the Defendant borrowed money from the victim to pay the amount of money upon credit,” and “the Defendant would have paid the amount of money upon credit.”