In this regard, the defendant and prosecutor appealed only the guilty part, and the acquittal part of the judgment of the court below became final and conclusive, and the scope of this court's judgment is limited to

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant did not use the 50,00 won paper paper 50,000 won paper as stated in the judgment of the court below, but it is difficult to view that the facts charged were proven only by the evidence examined in the court below, but the court below accepted the facts charged and sentenced the Defendant guilty. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts as

(2) The sentence of imprisonment (five years of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor (five years of imprisonment) by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the Defendant and the witness BM’s statement in the trial: (i) the Defendant: (a) purchased colons in E at the time indicated in the facts charged; (b) took over the first 50,000 won paper paper (hereinafter “the instant paper paper paper”) to the point F; (c) the Defendant appeared to be in light of the light of the paper paper of this case received from the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant paid money to the Defendant after being gromaticly produced; (c) the Defendant requested the Bank to deposit the sales amount containing the paper paper of this case to the Bank employees BM; and (d) after checking the amount of money received from the F in the cash coefficient, the Defendant paid money due to the absence of any particular excess.