The guilty part against Defendant B is reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that this shall not apply.

A. Defendant A’s sentence (a year, June, and confiscation) of the lower court is unfair because it is too unreasonable (an unfair sentencing). B. Defendant B’s guilty part of the facts, or the facts charged by the lower court that the lower court convicted Defendant B (a) merely deposited money exceeding 2,00 U.S. dollars 2,00 on three occasions over the same day for a period of three months, into the account of C. As such, the Defendant’s act cannot be deemed to have reached the extent that the Defendant’s business was engaged in small-amount remittance under the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act. Thus, the lower court’s judgment on the guilty part is erroneous by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2) The sentence of the lower court (one year of suspended sentence and additional collection for six months of imprisonment) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

(c)

1) Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor as to the acquittal portion on Defendant B, the above Defendant was aware that the money remitted by C was a profit accrued from the forgery of a foreign registration certificate.

It is reasonable to see that the above defendant was aware of C's funds as "the act of export or import without declaration under the Customs Act" (hereinafter "the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds"). Thus, the non-reported export or import constitutes a serious crime provided for in the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds. Thus, funds received from C, such as the second period of crime list of crimes in the judgment of the court below (excluding the case No. 8,90 per annum), constitute criminal proceeds.

In recognition that the above funds are criminal proceeds, the act of receiving them to a borrowed account managed by the defendant through the account of Vietnam constitutes an act that pretends to the fact about the acquisition or disposition of criminal proceeds (the violation of the Regulation on the Concealment of Criminal Proceeds) but aids and abets the forgery of public documents against the above defendant.