The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, fraud was made on April 6, 2007.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since money delivered by the victims to the defendant is not a loan, but a loan is an investment, and the defendant made an investment in real estate, etc. with the purpose of the investment, there is no deceit from the victims, and there is no fact that the defendant received money from the victim C or there is no fact that E or D was sufficient, it cannot be deemed that the defendant committed deception against them.

B. At the time, the Defendant: (a) owned a house located in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government N; (b) a commercial building located in the second floor of the O building located in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si (201, 202); (c) Lestop in the Seoul Mapo-gu P; and (d) an amount equivalent to KRW 350 million in the monthly income of KRW 10 million in the above Lestop; and (d) an amount equivalent to KRW 45 million in the above Lestop; and (e) paid for the victims KRW 315 million in the amount of KRW 50 million in the amount of KRW.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below on April 6, 2007 and the record of the register of real estate register, and the written statement of the Financial Transaction Information Meeting, the defendant borrowed KRW 200 million from the victim D through C on April 6, 2007, and set up the right to collateral security at the victim D with the maximum debt amount of KRW 260 million with respect to the land and the ground of Yongsan-gu Seoul, Seoul, which is the real estate owned by the defendant. The real estate whose market price was approximately KRW 60 million at the time of the above loan can be recognized that there was a senior collateral security right with the maximum debt amount of KRW 324 million with the maximum debt amount of KRW 50 million with the single bank as the mortgagee, and that there was a senior collateral security right claim of KRW 50 million with the maximum debt amount of KRW 60 million with the maximum debt amount of KRW 60 million with the victim D at the time of setting the right to collateral security against the victim D.