The judgment below

The part, excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

The defendant is innocent.

1. The lower court rejected an application for compensation by an applicant for compensation, and pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the applicant for compensation failed to file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation. Therefore, the part dismissing the said application for compensation was immediately finalized.

Therefore, among the judgment below, the dismissal of the above application for compensation is excluded from the scope of adjudication of this court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

3. Although the Defendant asserted the grounds for appeal only on the grounds of unfair sentencing, the Defendant alleged to the effect that he had no criminal intent to acquire money at the time of the instant crime, and that he/she had an intent to repay borrowed money, and that he/she had an ability to do so, first of all, we examine this point ex officio.

The criminal defendant is presumed innocent until the judgment of conviction becomes final and conclusive (Article 27(4) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea and Article 275-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act). In addition, the principle of "the interest of the defendant when he/she is in doubt" does not specifically stipulate the Criminal Procedure Act, but it is a major principle that controls the criminal trial as the basic principle of a constitutional state inherent in the above

Therefore, the finding of guilt in a criminal trial should be based on evidence of probative value, which makes it possible for a judge to have the truth that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to form such a conviction, it is doubtful that the defendant is guilty even if there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do11771, Feb. 26, 2015). The criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, is, insofar as the defendant does not make a confession, the history, environment, and content of the crime before and after the commission of the crime.