A. The Defendant is only aware that a credit service provider, who distributed advertising leaflets to himself/herself, received daily allowances and distributed them without knowing that the credit service provider was a unregistered credit service provider.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted after examining the evidence duly admitted as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the following facts can be revealed.

The defendant started the distribution of leaflets and received education on loans from credit service providers, etc., and at that time, the so-called largephones were also paid.

The education included the content that the core of the Handphones should be deducted in the event of crackdown.

As stated in the facts charged in the judgment of the court below, the Defendant distributed a loan leaflet for about two months between the two-months. At each time, the Defendant made an off-to-land number plate operated.

The defendant tried to resist and flee to police officers, and after being arrested, sent them to the toilet at the time of diving.

In other words, the chips of the Handphones are deducted from toilets.

The defendant, upon receiving the police investigation, stated that the credit service provider was aware of all the names and offices of the credit service provider.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of all the circumstances indicated in the records, such as the circumstances leading up to the Defendant to commit the instant crime, loans and interest on the number of days, it may be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant distributed the information knowing that it was an advertisement leaflet of an illegal credit service provider.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is not accepted.

B. There is no significant change in circumstances to consider the sentencing of the defendant after the judgment of the court below regarding the unfair argument of sentencing.

In light of the records of this case and the reasons for sentencing of the judgment of the court below, the court below’s sentence is to be imposed even in light of all the circumstances alleged by the defendant on the grounds of appeal.