A. Since the Defendant, by mistake of fact, brought the victim’s loss to recover the principal, the Defendant did not have any intention of theft or illegal acquisition.

In addition, there was no cash in the damages of one victim.

However, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one million won penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant, at the lower court, made the same assertion as the grounds for appeal on this part, and the lower court rejected the above assertion in detail, following the summary column of the evidence, “as alleged by the Defendant and its judgment”.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in comparison with the records of this case, the judgment of the court below is just and it is erroneous in the misapprehension of law as alleged by the defendant, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the Defendant’s illegality of sentencing is the primary offender who has no record of criminal punishment, and that the Defendant’s health condition and economic situation are not good.

However, it is recognized that the defendant did not seem to have a strong attitude of reflection, such as consistently denying the crime, and denying the crime, from the standpoint that it is difficult for the defendant to understand up to the trial of the party.

In addition, in full view of the various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, and there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that make it possible to change the sentencing of the lower court after the judgment of the lower court, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit.