A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six years.

A. In fact, the Defendant, as the head of a branch office, recognized that I’s business was a method to prevent the return of I’s business through regular meetings between I and the heads of the branch offices, but the I’s overseas business was raising a big profit.

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the victims of each fraud among the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of violating the Act on Door-to-Door Sales, Etc. among the facts charged in the instant case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine, while recognizing that the Defendant committed an act prohibiting under Article 24(1)1 of the Act on Door-to-Door Sales, Etc. (hereinafter “Door-to-Door Sales Act”) by making money transactions without trading goods, etc. using an organization composed of persons who are similar to the multi-level marketing organization by stages.

(c)

Although the court below failed to make a decision on the resumption of hearing and the hearing and the continuation of the hearing on ex officio investigation of evidence by the prosecutor, the court below failed to make a decision, and requested an opportunity to present opinions on the violation of the door-to-door sales law, but did not accept it. The court below erred in the misapprehension of the trial and the proceeding of the procedure.

2. We examine ex officio prior to judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

The prosecutor added the previous facts charged by the court below which found the defendant not guilty as of March 1, 200 and March 1, 2000 as stated in Paragraph 3(a) and 3(b)(1) of the same Article. However, with respect to each fraud, the name of the crime is referred to as "the aiding and abetting fraud", "Articles 347(1), 32, 37, and 38 of the Criminal Act", "Application for Amendments to Bill of Indictment added to the facts charged as stated in Paragraph 1 of the same Article, and this Court grants permission.