A. Since a mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of fraud of this case is the same as the fraud of the victim L of the case, Busan District Court 2013No3003, which became final and conclusive, the judgment of acquittal should be pronounced. However, the court below convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to mistake or acquittal, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Although there was no fact that the Defendant committed the larceny of this case, the lower court found him guilty of this part of the facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

C. The sentence of a fine of two million won imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records on the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of fraud of this case, the defendant, around May 8, 2013, obtained 30,000 won from the victim as repair cost and acquired them by deception, even though he/she received the repair cost from the victim L, he/she did not have the intent or ability to repair the computer, and in fact, he/she would repair the repair cost to the victim without any intention or ability to repair the computer.

“The crime of fraud, etc. is deemed to have become final and conclusive on April 30, 2014 after being sentenced to imprisonment of one year and six months at the Busan District Court on January 24, 2014 due to the crime of fraud, etc., but the above crime is only the same fact as the facts charged of the crime of fraud against the victim C who was acquitted at the lower court, and it does not seem to have the same factual relation as the facts charged of the crime of fraud in

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In full view of the evidence duly examined and adopted, the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts regarding the instant theft crime, and the Defendant is charged with this part of the facts charged.