The punishment of the accused shall be ten months of imprisonment.

A. Defendant: Error of facts (the Defendant believed that the Defendant would be able to repay the principal and the proceeds to the victim by September 30, 201 after receiving the remittance of KRW 100 million from the victim C, which caused investment by E’s explanation, and only did the victim have certified the first written investment agreement, which was June 10, 201. At the time of June 9, 201, the Defendant did not belong to the victim. At the time of the completion of the preparation for sampling, such as the design drawing of the improved public telephone site, etc., in which a large amount of investment was made, and there was no scope of fraud by the Defendant) and unfair sentencing.

Prosecutor: 2. Judgment of this Court

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, even if the Defendant only got out of the victim after receiving money from the victim, there was a sufficient consensus on the fact that the Defendant and E have borrowed KRW 100 million from the victim for a three-month period and refund KRW 150 million at the maturity of the payment (387 pages, 405 pages of the trial record) and there was an implicit understanding that E would like to actively induce investors to make investments or induce investment funds, so long as it seems that there was an implicit understanding that the Defendant had conspired with E at least implicitly, and there is sufficient room to regard the Defendant as deceiving the victim. In addition, in light of the progress of the Defendant’s business with financial resources or the progress of the Defendant’s business conducted at the time of the Defendant’s operation, even if the Defendant had to fully repaid KRW 150 million,000,000,000,000 after the Defendant had been making it difficult to accept the Defendant’s assertion that there was any defect in the victim’s intent to obtain money.

(b)each of the two;