A. The Defendant is guilty of all of the parts of the judgment below which found the Defendant guilty of all of the parts of the set-off 1 through 3, although he conspired with F in collusion with F to administer phiphones, such as the part of the criminal facts set forth in the judgment of the court below (hereinafter “the set-off 1 denial part”), 2 (hereinafter “the set-off part”), 3 (hereinafter “the set-off part”), and 3 (hereinafter “the set-off part”).

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment and additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below as to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts [Article 312 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act: Provided, That the evidence prepared in the process of each police interrogation protocol (No. 5 and 6 of the list of evidence) and the police investigation protocol with respect to F, regardless of its form, is deemed to have consented to the defendant's rejection of the contents at the first trial date, and thus, it cannot be admitted as evidence since the defendant conspireds with the court below for all of the following circumstances, such as the 2003Do6548 of Jan. 13, 2006, and the 2003Do718527, Jul. 15, 2004, the court below held that the defendant conspireds with the court below as evidence to the effect that he denies the contents thereof on the date of the first trial date (see Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do6548 of Jul. 15, 2004). 207.

Since it is reasonable to see that the judgment of the court below which found all of the set 1 or 3 denied parts is just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of factual mistake is rejected.

(1) The F shall be governed by the original judgment and the prosecution.