A. Prosecutor 1) Whether the Defendant mismisunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles as to the portion of the crime without fault or adjusted F, or that the head office D electronic inventory goods would be sold and paid up to April 30, 2013.

In light of the statement of J and the statement of E that the provisional attachment was cancelled on the ground that the provisional attachment was cancelled, and the statement of E that the Defendant prepared a letter of payment as the Defendant did. The Defendant delivered to J a letter of payment that “F (E, Defendant) would pay the price of the goods by April 30, 2013 upon the termination of provisional attachment; D was a bad credit holder at the time; D was a bad credit holder at the time; the Defendant managed F; the Defendant managed F; and there was a need to cancel the provisional attachment on the deposit account of E bank account, which is the F’s principal transaction account. In light of the above, the Defendant, at least by requesting the J to cancel the provisional attachment with dolus negligence, obtained pecuniary profits equivalent to the above transaction value by making a request for the cancellation of the provisional attachment.

may be appointed by a person.

Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby acquitted the charge of fraud among the facts charged.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

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

2. Determination

A. As to the Prosecutor’s misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the lower court, on the grounds of the acquittal portion, explained in detail the various circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, and comprehensively taking account of such circumstances, it was proven that the Defendant had a criminal intent to acquire the transaction value of the E’s bank account at the time of requesting the J to release a provisional attachment to the extent that there is no reasonable

It is difficult to see otherwise, and there is no proof of the crime of fraud among the facts charged on the grounds that there is no evidence to acknowledge it.