All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. The Defendant (e.g., a fine of three million won) is too heavy.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts (the fact that there is a conflict, a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violence, etc.)) Ha makes a consistent statement from an investigative agency to the court of the original trial that corresponds to this part of the facts charged, and the above statement has credibility and its contents are very specific, and even if I reverses his statement in the investigative agency of witness I, it can be fully admitted to this part of the facts charged in view of the fact that there is credibility.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that there was no evidence to prove each of the above facts charged is erroneous in the misconception of facts.

2. The sentence of the lower court on the grounds of unfair sentencing is too minor.

2. Regarding the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. On October 7, 2010, the summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) The Defendant, upon receiving a demand from the victim to return five million won from the victim on or before October 7, 2010, the Defendant: (b) 1 million won from the victim of the facts charged: (c) he borrowed lap lap lap, and borrowed lap lap, before the lap lap lap lap lap lap lap lap lap lap lap lap lap lap, or lap lap lap lap lap lap lap, and then deducted five million won in cash from the victim’s left part of the facts charged at one time at the victim’s lap lap lap lap, the lower court held that this part of the facts charged are as follows: (d) although there was evidence supporting this part of the facts charged, this court duly adopted and investigated the victim from the Defendant 1 and the victim.