A. As to the fraud around December 9, 201, the prosecutor (1) and the erroneous determination of facts, the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, despite the fact that: (a) there was no circumstance in which the Defendant, at the time of receiving KRW 7 million from E, did not have to guarantee the profit or return the principal; and (b) there was an error of misconception of facts in the misapprehension of the legal principles, even though the Defendant was not guilty of this part of the facts charged, despite the fact that the Defendant agreed to guarantee a certain amount of profit or return the principal at the time of receiving KRW 7 million from E.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (700,000 won of a fine) is excessively unjustifiable and unjust.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court is excessively unreasonable.

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

A. On December 9, 201, the lower court determined that: (a) as to the facts charged that the Defendant acquired KRW 7 million from E as an investment fund in real estate brokerage from E and acquired it, there was a loan certificate specifying the due date for a monetary transaction in the money transaction between the Defendant and E; (b) on the other hand, as to the above KRW 7 million, where the E deposits KRW 7 million into the Defendant’s account, the Defendant only prepared and delivered documents stating “E operates real estate jointly through mutual cooperation for one year from December 9, 2011 to one year; and (c) E stated that the fact that it belongs to the Defendant was because it did not comply with the promise on gains; (d) on June 27, 2012, E did not file a complaint against the Defendant at the time of the submission of the agreement on KRW 1,100,000,000,000,000 and KRW 5,000,000,00,000.