The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant entered into a contract with the victim to receive the total construction cost of KRW 24 million as advance payment, and accordingly, did not proceed with the construction even if the Defendant received the payment of KRW 12 million. However, this is aimed at receiving a part of the construction cost that the victim would not pay for the part of the construction cost already proceeded, and thus, the Defendant did not have the intention to acquire it by deception.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The deception as a requirement for fraud refers to all affirmative and passive acts that have to observe each other in the context of property transaction, and it does not necessarily require false indication as to the important part of a juristic act, and it is sufficient to say that it is the basis for judgment in order to make an actor take a disposition of property which he wishes by omitting the other party in mistake. Therefore, in cases where it is recognized that the other party to the transaction would not have received a notice of certain circumstances, if the other party to the transaction would have been notified of such circumstances, a person who receives the property is obligated to notify the other party of such circumstances in advance in accordance with the principle of good faith.

Nevertheless, it constitutes a crime of fraud by deceiving the other party by implied disregarding the fact that the notice has not been given.

In addition, fraud is a crime established by deceiving another person to receive property or acquiring pecuniary gain based on the defective intention caused by the deception, and the essence of fraud is the acquisition of property or pecuniary gain by deception and the other party is the acquisition of property or pecuniary gain by deception.