The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant is guilty of facts in this part of the facts charged even though he did not intend to acquire 500 million won by deceiving the victim E, and the court below found the guilty of this part of the facts charged. This part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (two years of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the relevant legal doctrine is established by deceiving another person to make a mistake by inducing a dispositive act or inducing a dispositive act, and thus, there is a causal relationship between deception, mistake, and property disposal act. On the other hand, whether a certain act constitutes deception that causes a mistake to another person, and whether there exists a causal relationship between such deception and property disposal act should be determined generally and objectively by taking into account the circumstances of transaction, the other party’s knowledge, character, experience, occupation, etc. Therefore, in a case where the existence of deception or causal relationship is conducted under close relation with the victim’s property disposal act or the business failure or performance to promote the defendant’s act, the determination of the existence of such deception or causal relationship cannot be made on the basis of the victim’s financial power or credit status, etc. The relationship between the victim and the defendant, the victim’s awareness and involvement in the relevant business, the victim’s specific developments leading up to property disposal in relation to the relevant business, the possibility of success of the relevant business, and the occupation of the victim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision).