A. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecution, such as the misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (not guilty part) E, K’s statement, and narcotics appraisal results on the part of the prosecution, the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, even though it is sufficiently found that the facts charged regarding the fraud against N, P, Q, and E were guilty, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence against an unfair defendant in sentencing (the imprisonment of eight months, two years of suspended execution, and forty hours of violent therapy) is too uncomfortable and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles exists to the public prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on the evidence with probative value sufficient to make a judge not to have any reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is any doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it shall be judged as the defendant's interest (see Supreme Court Decision 94Do3309 delivered on April 12, 1996). The court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged while presenting detailed reasoning for the judgment. Examining the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below in light of the records, the evidence submitted by the public prosecutor alone proves that this part of the facts charged was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Therefore, the lower court’s judgment that acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged does not seem to have erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, as otherwise alleged by the prosecutor.

Therefore, prosecutor's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

B. The fact that the crime is not good in light of the content of the crime, and that there is no agreement with some victims, etc. on the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognizes and reflects the crime, and the court below's decision.