According to the records, although the defendant asserted a mistake of facts in the statement of grounds for appeal, and the defendant did not withdraw the above mistake of facts on the date of the original trial, the court below determined the defendant's grounds for appeal only as unreasonable

The defendant asserts the same purport as the grounds for appeal, which includes the argument that the court below omitted the judgment on the above grounds for appeal.

However, according to the evidence adopted by the court of first instance maintained by the court below, the defendant can be fully convicted of the facts charged in this case. The court below did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, but did not err by misapprehending the law of logic and experience or by misapprehending the relevant legal principles. Thus, the error of omission in the judgment is not affected by the judgment.

Ultimately, this part of the grounds of appeal cannot be accepted.

Meanwhile, the argument that the amount of fraud by the defendant is less than KRW 47,50,000 shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is asserted by the defendant only when it reaches the final appeal that the defendant did not regard it as the ground for appeal or that it was not subject to

Furthermore, even if ex officio examination is conducted, there is no error as alleged in the judgment below.

In addition, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing may be filed only when the court below rendered a death penalty, an indefinite term, or an imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, an appeal is not allowed to be

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.