The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below rejected the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation, and since the applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation order pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the above order for compensation was immediately finalized, the part of the court below's rejection of the application for compensation order is excluded from the object of adjudication by this court

Therefore, the scope of this court's adjudication is limited to the defendant case.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, it means an agreement in which the victim B made a contribution to the Defendant, or at least the victim of the distribution profit distribution agreement through the joint business, divided the distribution profit that the victim received while supplying the Defendant with the goods.

Since it is a loan related to the distribution profit distribution agreement, it should be settled together with the settlement of profits under the distribution profit distribution agreement, and there is no deception for the defendant.

Furthermore, the Defendant had the intent or ability to pay money from the victim.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of fraud has erred by misapprehending the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine of fraud.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The lower court determined that the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the instant money at the time of borrowing the instant money with the nature of the loan when comprehensively taking into account the facts or circumstances of the judgment regarding the fraud. In so doing, the lower court found the Defendant guilty.

B. According to the evidence duly admitted by the lower court and the first instance court as to the nature of money that the victim gave to the Defendant, the victim transferred the sum of KRW 142,886,164 to the Defendant around November 10, 2015 (hereinafter “the instant case”).