The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with labor for not less than six months) of the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment is based on the following circumstances: (a) in this case, for the purpose of settling the existing debt even though the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to repay the money, the Defendant was granted a loan from the victim's social stock company on the pretext of purchasing the vehicle for the purpose of settling the existing debt; (b) the nature of the crime is not good; (c) the Defendant did not agree with the victim up to the trial; and (d) the Defendant was subject to criminal punishment on the ground

However, considering the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant led to the crime of this case and reflects his mistake, that the defendant appears to have repaid some of the loans of this case, that there was no record of criminal punishment except the above previous criminal records, that the defendant has grown in an unfortunate environment, that it seems that the defendant had an opportunity to know that he was satisfying the punishment through his prison life for three months, that the defendant has made the best efforts to recover from damage without re-offending, and that the defendant has made the best efforts to recover from damage, and that all other sentencing conditions such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is somewhat unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the following judgment is rendered again after pleading.

[Discied Judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.