A. In order to receive a return of money obtained by the victim, the Defendant did not think that the message was sent to the Kakao Stockholm message on the crime, and did not actually engage in the actual implementation of the message.

Therefore, it cannot be deemed that there was an intention to commit a crime against the defendant, and the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate act that does not violate social norms.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The judgment of the court below also asserted the same purport in the court below. The court below held that ① the defendant was aware of the victim in the course of investing in D as stated in its judgment, and the defendant was formed with investment consultation and advice and formed an internal relationship with the victim and was privately more closely and closely related to the defendant's investment, and thus the victim appears to have part of the part of the defendant's investment. However, such investment circumstance alone seems to be difficult to readily conclude that the defendant excluded the part that the defendant invested in the old accounts related to C and D for the purpose of high profit, and it is difficult to specify the defendant as well as the full amount of the investment and earnings, and the obligation to return the defendant's loan interest, etc., to the victim. ② Even if the defendant has a civil claim against the victim, even if the defendant had a business relationship with the victim after the end of November 2017, the defendant maintained a business relationship with the victim and was used by the victim, and the defendant did not request the defendant to pressure the victim as stated in its judgment.