The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although a mistake of facts recognizes the fact that the defendant did not borrow and repay funds when the liabilities were accumulated due to the construction of a new F building, the court below found the victims guilty of all the charges, despite the fact that there was an error of misconception of the fact that there was no intention or deception in the charges, since the victims were aware of the financial situation of the defendant at the time and the reasons why the funds were needed, and used the borrowed funds for

B. 1-A of the judgment of the court below on the sentence of unfair sentencing imposed on the defendant.

The crime and judgment No. 2-A.

Punishment of Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than 6 months and No. 1

(b).

The crime and judgment No. 2-b.

One and half years of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime shall be deemed to be unfair.

2. Determination

A. In the judgment of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant argued the same purport as the reasons for appeal, and the court below rejected the above assertion in detail under the title "a decision on the defendant's and his defense counsel's assertion" in the judgment, which is "a decision on the defendant's assertion". Examining the judgment of the court below in comparison with the evidence legitimately adopted and examined, the defendant had owned the land in Gangnam-gu P at the time of borrowing money from the victims, and the land X and the building of the training institute on the land in the city where the defendant was allowed at the time of borrowing the money from the victims, but there was a large amount of debt for each of the above real estate, such as the registration of establishment of a mortgage and the registration of provisional attachment, etc., completed with a considerable amount of time for the above real estate, and in fact, the defendant has already been liable for a large amount of debt, and the ownership of the above real estate was transferred to a third party according to the procedure commenced by each request for voluntary auction on October 2005.