The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. When a judgment of a mistake of facts was rendered, the Defendant had the criminal intent of deceiving the victim L by deceiving the victim L by deceiving him/her, and could repay the borrowed money with sufficient repayment ability at that time. However, the judgment of the court below convicting the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in matters of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment. (b) The judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. The punishment sentenced by the court below of unfair sentencing (the punishment of imprisonment and six months is excessively unreasonable).

2. Determination

A. 1) The determination of the assertion of mistake of facts is bound to be made by taking into account the objective circumstances, such as the Defendant’s financial history, environment, details of the crime, and the process of performing transactions, insofar as the Defendant does not confession, insofar as the crime of fraud, which is a subjective constituent element of the crime, is established. The crime of fraud is also established by willful negligence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do8781, Jan. 18, 2008). In addition, in the case of fraud involving property taking advantage of property, if the property was provided by deception, it constitutes an infringement on the victim’s property, thereby constituting fraud. Even if considerable consideration was paid or there was no damage to the victim’s entire property, the establishment of the crime of fraud does not affect the establishment of the crime of fraud (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Do1899, Jul. 7, 200); in light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the following circumstances, namely, the Defendant, at least two hundred five (300 million won).