A. There is no fact that the Defendant conspireds to commit the instant crime, and there is no fact that the Defendant served as a cash management liability and a cash receipt liability.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is established by satisfying the subjective and objective requirements, namely, the implementation of a crime through a functional control based on the intent of co-processing and the intent of co-processing. The so-called crime liability as a co-principal may be established depending on the case of a person who directly shared part of the constituent elements and failed to implement the crime. However, in order to avoid such crime liability, a functional control through essential contribution to the crime should not be acknowledged, rather than a mere conspiracy, in full view of the status, role, control or neglect of the progress of the crime, etc. In addition, in light of all the circumstances, such as the means and attitudes of the crime, possibility, anticipated and anticipated response to the crime, which is committed by the conspiracy, was committed in order to achieve or achieve the purpose of the crime, and even if there was no possibility of such possibility, it should be deemed that the criminal act was committed in excess of 100 and 200, and the criminal act was committed in excess of 130,000).