A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

A. The Defendant was not willinging to commit the instant crime.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's authority, the prosecutor applied for permission to modify the indictment as follows (the judgment in writing) in the trial of the court below. Since this court's permission changes the subject of the judgment, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

The defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal. Therefore, the following is examined.

B. Determination as to the assertion of mistake of fact 1) In the co-offender relationship that two or more persons of the relevant legal principles jointly process for a crime, the conspiracy does not require any legal penalty, but only constitutes a combination of intent to realize the crime by combining two or more persons to jointly process a certain crime and realize the crime. Although there was no process of the whole conspiracy.

Even if there is a combination between several persons, a public contest relationship is established, and even if a person who did not directly participate in the act of execution, even if he did not directly participate in the act of execution, he/she shall be held liable as a principal offender for the act of another person. In this case, even if there is no direct evidence, it may be recognized by the circumstantial facts and empirical rules (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do4320, May 11, 2006). In this case, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., (i) the defendant was given a call from a man without his/her name to find the amount equivalent to KRW 2-30,000,000 which was deposited by him/her.