All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. While the Defendant (a factual mistake) received the same value from the victim and received and retained the same value, the Defendant delivered it to E on July 15, 2013, G and K on the part of E, and thus, did not deceiving the victim.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, including the prosecutor’s statement of mistake of facts (as to the acquittal part) and the prosecutor’s statement, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant acquired money from the complainant as “E Development Fund”.

Dob. The sentence of unfair sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unhued and unjust.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts, namely, the defendant acknowledged the fact that he was paid 50 million won from the victim to G andK on July 15, 2013, but on the other hand, the defendant was paid 50 million won from the victim to G on July 5, 2013 and paid 50 million won to G on July 15, 2013 (Evidence No. 185 of the Evidence Record, No. 185 of the Record), and the defendant did not appear to have made a false statement on July 5, 2013 by connecting 80,000 won to the victim's account at the time of the police's statement (Evidence No. 185 of the Record, No. 185 of the Record, No. 500,000 won and 050,000 won as evidence of this case.