A. As to the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (Defendant 1) and ① fraud, the court below found the defendant guilty on the part of the victim’s statement, based only on the victim’s statement although the defendant did not demand additional 200 million won in cash to the victim, and the defendant’s mother did not request the victim’s additional 100 million won in cash and did not request a part of the shares to the defendant’s mother, and thus, found the defendant guilty on this part of the charges by misunderstanding the fact that the defendant actually received money from the victim and delivered it to K, and misunderstanding the legal principles as to the burden of proof in criminal procedure and misunderstanding the fact that there was reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant had the intention to commit fraud, and misunderstanding the legal principles as to the burden of proof in criminal procedure.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, namely, ① the defendant was 200 million won in the name of solicitation, finging the victim to make a solicitation through the later vessel. However, the victim did not have a fluence that he made a solicitation regarding the selection of cleaning agency from the defendant by making cash to the defendant from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, and the defendant did not have a fluence that he made a solicitation in relation to the selection of cleaning agency through the "K" or the defendant's assertion, and Y was well known by him as X.