The guilty portion shall be reversed.

As to the crime No. 1 of the judgment of the defendant, the crime No. 2, 3, and 5 of the judgment of the court below.

A. misunderstanding of facts 1) As to each of the facts charged in the instant case’s fraud, the Defendant is a stock company H (hereinafter “H”) in which the Defendant served as an executive director on his name-oriented persons (one-one K, one-one L director).

(2) As to each of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant did not have any criminal intent to commit fraud as to each of the frauds in relation to each of the following facts: (a) the Defendant continued to trade with the victimized enterprises on several occasions and paid the goods normally, but the Defendant did not pay only the goods indicated in this part of the facts charged because the Defendant did not have any intent to pay the goods by means of dumping after being supplied by many victimized enterprises and disposing of them as dumping, or by failing to pay the goods with a promissory note in the name of H; (b) as to each of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant did not have any criminal intent to commit fraud.

In addition, with respect to the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act among the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant acquired the electronic financial means of access to the instant case with the consent of AD in order to freely deposit and collect the payment for business, and was not intended to use it for fraud.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the first crime on the market: imprisonment with prison labor for six months, and the second, third, and fourth crimes: imprisonment with prison labor for five years) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant is located in the Seoul Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Office No. 408 (hereinafter “G office”) from July 2007 to May 2008.