A. The Defendant of mistake of facts was simply employed to assist D’s work, and did not engage in a foreign exchange business without registration in collusion with D.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, the defendant was well aware that D had established a money exchange center in D's wife K and illegally remitted it to China; ② The defendant was directly involved in the crime of this case, such as the amount of remittance to be remitted to China by Chinese people in Korea and the account number to D as text messages, etc., the defendant can sufficiently recognize the facts of conducting foreign exchange business without registration in collusion with D.

B. Although it is clear that the defendant made foreign exchange transactions in collusion with D in collusion with D in order to deny the crime, etc., the court below, taking into account the number of foreign exchange transactions, the amount of transactions, the period of crime, etc., reduced the amount of fine to KRW 3 million under the summary order to KRW 2 million, and other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, the motive and circumstance of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., are considered, the court below's punishment is too unreasonable, and thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is without merit.