We reverse the judgment of the first instance court.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) and the victim B were connected with the Defendant at the time of the instant case. The reason why the Defendant paid money to the Defendant is merely to assist the Defendant’s business, and there is no fact that the Defendant deceiving B as stated in the facts of the first instance judgment, thereby deceiving the Defendant.

2. Determination:

A. On April 2014, the Defendant: (a) came to death after having become aware of the Victim B at the multi-stage cosmetics sales presentation around Mapo-gu Seoul, Mapo-gu; and (b) on the part of the Defendant, he was preparing for a cosmetic business.

In the U.S., the father and the father have not yet been able to pay money to the father and the father and the father and the father have been prudented and used for life.

In the course of the communication business, those who became aware of the communications business have also made an investment of KRW 1 billion in the cosmetics business.

In order to explain the project to investors, the cost of sampling shall be required, and if only 30 million won is lent, the investment or the father shall be paid immediately if he/she pays the money.

If money enters, it shall be used only for six months, and it shall be repaid by the end of October.

“Around April 21, 2014, with a new bank account (Account Number C) opened in the name of the Defendant from the injured party, the sum of KRW 20 million was transferred to KRW 10 million on April 26, 2014, and KRW 10 million on April 26, 2014.

However, at the time of fact, the Defendant did not have any property and revenue source to borrow the above money from the damaged party, and there was no intent or ability to repay the money, and the money received as above was used in all personal living expenses of the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim, thereby deceiving 20 million won from the victim.

(b) the court shall fairly and fairly render its judgment (i).

The prosecutor's facts charged and the evidence supporting the prosecutor's question of disagreement, contradiction, and doubt, and rather, the defendant's assertion and evidence are the standard of the microscope and strict proof on the premise of the non-existence.