The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misconception of facts, even though the defendant knowingly purchased the above vehicle with the knowledge that he stolen a Vietnam-style cruise vehicle, and therefore, the defendant did not have any intention to commit a crime by fraud.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, including the testimony at the court below and the trial court of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant acquired money by deceiving the victim S with regard to the right to dispose of the vehicle, even though the fact was the theft of the above bee-cirse vehicle, as stated in the judgment of the court below.

The fact that the Defendant agreed with the victims as stated in the facts of the lower judgment’s crime 1 through 4, and that the victims S of the crime 5 are recovered from damage, etc. can be acknowledged as a favorable circumstance to the Defendant.

However, on April 6, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of causing special obstruction of performance of official duties at Seoul High Court on April 12, 2012, which became final and conclusive on April 12, 2012, and committed the instant crime without any reflectiveness despite the fact during the period of suspension of execution. The Defendant was punished by imprisonment with prison labor and several criminal records, including the Defendant, and the victims of the instant crime committed several repeated benefits by cutting away and selling vehicles of the victims who have a friendly relationship without any small amount of damage. The Defendant still did not reach an agreement with the U.S., and there was no change in circumstances after the judgment of the lower court, and there are other various conditions of sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime,