A. Fact-misunderstanding (the point of selling philophones) Defendant provided Llophones free of charge on August 16, 2016, and L at that time offered 50,00 won to the Defendant rather than a purchase price, and thus, the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged and thereby adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant (one year of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection KRW 430,00) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts (the point of sale of phiphonephones) also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part of the facts charged by the defendant, and the court below held that there is a little example to give money to the defendant in consideration of the following: ① When L was investigated by the defendant due to his own number, it appears that the defendant had been given an unwritten appraisal; ② the defendant was contacted before his arrest; ③ the relation between L and the defendant; and L's economic situation; and L lent money to the defendant.

The defendant's assertion is rejected on the ground that the testimony of the court below that L did not pay the price for phiphones in light of the fact that L did not provide a specific explanation as to its circumstances and conditions, and that there was a low amount of 50,000 won paid L in light of L's market price for phiphones trading, but it was not known of the market price due to L's lack of experience in trading phiphones, and that it could not be readily concluded that L's phiphones trading was not the purchase price.

In light of the records and the above legal principles, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant-appellant.