The punishment of the accused shall be determined by a year of imprisonment.

A. Since the fact that a criminal judgment already became final and conclusive on the same factual basis of the same assertion of mistake of fact is a serious evidence, it cannot be recognized that the fact is inconsistent with the fact-finding of the criminal trial unless there are special circumstances where it is difficult to accept the fact-finding of

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of first instance on June 25, 2009 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do10096, Jun. 25, 2009). At the time before and after each of the crimes of this case, the defendant received large amounts of money under the name of borrowed money or deposit money, etc. from the representative of the company with the intent to participate in the interior subcontract work or the sales agency work of the commercial building of this case on the ground of the status of executor, but at the time when the defendant actually entered into such contract and did not have the intent or ability to execute such contract, it is sufficient to view that the defendant acquired money from the victims under the name of the victim, such as borrowed money, etc. as the victim J, Q, U, and the witness G, V, and B, as stated in each of the charges of this case (in particular, the testimony of the witness of the court of first instance cannot be accepted as evidence or all of the charges of this case).

B. According to the sentencing guidelines on the assertion of unfair sentencing, each of the instant crimes is classified by the general fraud type 3 of the fraud group.