The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant pays 100,000,000 won to the applicant through fraud.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact misunderstanding ① The Defendant did not deceiving the victim and did not have the intent to commit fraud.

At the time of the instant case, the victim was aware that the Defendant was a plan to operate the swimming pool by being awarded a successful bid, and then understood that the situation has deteriorated due to the delay in construction of swimming pool facilities.

② Although the Defendant made a confession to acknowledge the facts charged at the court of original instance (the first trial date), this was the purport of recognizing the Defendant’s failure to repay the money to the victim by borrowing the money from the victim, and the Defendant made a statement without making detailed judgment on the matter.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court, unlike the Defendant’s assertion, may fully recognize the fact of deceiving the victim with the intent of deception.

(1) In order to entrust the entrusted operation of a swimming pool to a school, the defendant was basically required to have worked for at least five years, and at the time of this case, the defendant was not entitled to receive the award of the entrusted operation of the swimming pool in his name.

② Even if the Defendant voluntarily made a statement at an investigative agency, the Defendant sought to obtain a successful bid for the instant swimming pool entrusted under the name of the F president with the experience of entrusted operation of the swimming pool for at least five years, but did not participate in the instant swimming pool entrusted on the ground that the F’s line did not participate in the tender.

③ The Defendant used the money received from the injured party for personal purposes, such as living expenses, before March 2014, the bidding date for the entrusted operation right of the instant swimming pool, and subsequently did not return the money to the injured party even though the Defendant did not participate in the bidding for the entrusted operation right of the instant swimming pool.

④ Meanwhile, confession at the court of the court below is made by the defendant.