Defendant

As to the part of the annexed crime list No. 67 through No. 170 of the misunderstanding of facts in the court below's judgment, the defendant received money from F to the victim after hearing the words "as a person has a borrowed property of 30 billion won, he will incur a big amount of expenses to withdraw the money," and trust the above words to the victim, and there is no fact that he received money, and there is no intention to commit fraud by the defendant.

The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

The lower court’s sentence of the prosecutor (e.g., e., e., g., e., e.

Judgment

The Defendant asserted that the Defendant had the same purport as the grounds for appeal of this case, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion of mistake by explaining the Defendant’s assertion and judgment.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., (i) the defendant received money from the victim as a withdrawal of borrowed property, (ii) the defendant used the above money as a withdrawal of borrowed property, and (iii) the defendant did not have any specific use of the money for expenses incurred in withdrawing borrowed property; (iv) the defendant did not actually own borrowed property; and (v) the defendant filed a petition for bankruptcy in the amount of 400 million won with no special income or property; and (v) the defendant was a basic living beneficiary and the victim appears to have used some of the money as the living expenses of the defendant and F, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

Judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing by both parties.