The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact-finding, the Defendant believed that the instant scrap metal business belongs to E is practically possible, and invested KRW 100 million in the victim, and most of the money received from the victim was used for the instant scrap metal business.

Even though the defendant did not intend to acquire the property, the court below erred by misunderstanding the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of fraud.

B. Even if the judgment of the court below found the defendant guilty of unfair sentencing, the punishment imposed by the court below (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case and the summary of the facts charged in this case 1 at the time of the judgment of the court below, around August 2009, the Defendant made a false statement to the purport that “The Defendant would leave considerable profits if he/she invests KRW 500 million through a company run within the Republic of Korea, with the knowledge of the president who is related to high-level political parties.” The Defendant is promoting the business that would receive a large amount of scrap metal from all-class 38 associations and government-invested institutions, and from high-ranking associations and government-invested institutions, and from Russia to receive high-level scrap metal imported from all-class associations and government-invested institutions, and public institutions.”

However, at the time, the Defendant did not have conducted any prior review as to whether the above business was normally carried out or the profitability of the above business was earned, and the Defendant did not make any own investment and did not intend to attract all the same investors as the victim. The Defendant, at the time, committed an oral promise to invest only KRW 300 million in E, referred to as “the president” as above, even if he received money from the victim, he had a plan to use the money in a personal urgent room, and did not actually have any desire to invest the money. Thus, even if he received money from the victim, he used the money as investment money or received money from the victim.