The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. After entering into a contract with the victim, the Defendant merely used the construction cost to be paid to the victim for another urgent purpose because there is no temporary economic revenue on the wind that is difficult to expect after concluding the contract, and had the intent and ability to pay the construction cost to the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. In light of the fact that the defendant paid money to the victim of unfair sentencing, the sentence (a fine of KRW 700,000) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The deception as a requirement for a judgment of fraud as to the assertion of mistake of facts refers to all affirmative or passive acts that have to comply with each other in property transactional relations, and it does not necessarily require to be related to the important part of a juristic act, and it is sufficient to establish the basis for a judgment in order to allow an actor to conduct an act of disposal of property that he/she wishes by omitting the other party into mistake.

In addition, it is necessary to judge whether a certain act constitutes a deception that causes mistake of another person, taking into account the situation of the transaction, the other party's knowledge, experience, and occupation, and the specific circumstances at the time of the act.

In addition, insofar as the criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, is not the confession of the defendant, it shall be determined by taking into account the objective circumstances such as the financial history, environment, details and details of the crime before and after the crime, and the criminal intent is sufficient not to be a conclusive intention but to do so.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2009Do7459, Oct. 15, 2009; 2008Do1697, Jun. 23, 2009). The Defendant left the victim with respect to the construction of groundwater when developing groundwater on or around July 15, 2012.