The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As stated in the judgment of the court below, the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the ground that "the value of the mobile phone device is free of charge if a new mobile phone is replaced with a new mobile phone," is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence (one million won of fine) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. (1) Fraud as a requirement for fraud is a mistake of facts. The deception refers to any affirmative or passive act that has a good faith and sincerity to be observed by each other in a property transactional relationship, and it does not necessarily mean any important part of a juristic act. It is sufficient if it is about the basic fact of a judgment in order to allow the other party to make a disposition of property which the actor wishes by omitting the other party into mistake, and the determination of whether a certain act constitutes deception that causes a mistake of another person should be made generally and objectively by taking into account the specific circumstances at the time of the act, such as the transaction situation, the other party’s knowledge, experience, and occupation.

In addition, in the case of fraud involving taking advantage of property, if there is a delivery of property due to deception, it itself constitutes a crime of fraud by infringing the victim's property, and it was paid a considerable amount of consideration.

or the victim has no property damage as a whole;

Even if it does not affect the establishment of fraud.

In addition, insofar as the criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, is not the confession of the defendant, it is inevitable to judge by taking into account the objective circumstances such as the financial history, environment, details and details of the crime before and after the crime, and the criminal intent is not a conclusive intention, but a willful negligence.