The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The fact that the defendant borrowed 30 million won from the victim of the mistake of facts, or because he/she had the intention and ability to repay, it does not mean that he/she acquired the above money by fraud.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is unreasonable.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by C’s testimony of the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, C’s statement of the police protocol, and each police interrogation protocol (including the C’s statement) of the Defendant against the Defendant: (i) the Defendant called the victim on October 22, 2012 to the effect that “the Defendant may have borrowed KRW 30 million as it is necessary to pay the money to enter the day,” and then sent a text message to the victim to the effect that “if 30 million won is lent again to the victim on the same day, 30 million won shall be repaid on the 29th anniversary of the next week; (ii) the Defendant borrowed KRW 20 million from the victim on the police investigation; (iii) the Defendant could have actually claimed KRW 30 million as at the time of borrowing KRW 20 million from the victim; and (iv) the Defendant could have paid KRW 10 million to the victim on the 200,000 won and KRW 2 million as at the time of borrowing KRW 3 million from the victim on the same day.

The Defendant shall operate the Defendant with the victim’s ordinary money transaction relationship, and the date and time of the loan.