A. Defendant 1) Facts constituting the crime of the judgment of the court below

(a) and (b)

W did not supply W to W with a tank locks in advance, but W did not supply the object. Although W purchased the object in Japan, W did not deliver it to the victims due to lack of inventory.

Therefore, the defendant did not have the intention of defraudation.

B) In light of the following circumstances, the Defendant did not have any intention to defraudation in light of the crime No. 1-C. (3) of the judgment of the court below. (1) The portion of the crime No. 1-4 as indicated in the judgment of the court below: (a) was given money by placing an order for visibility to Japanese business entities; (b) was not received from Japanese business entities; and (c) at the time the Defendant’s account was seized, and thus, was not refunded. (2) The portion of the crime No. 3: around June 2017: (c) was disposed of a bank and paid the amount to the victim. (c) The portion of the crime No. 5: the money received from the victim was purchased in Japan, but the Defendant did not incur any visibility due to the history of the violation of the Customs Act; (c) was entrusted to pawning the victim’s bank during the course of performing the duties pursuant to the entrustment of paragraph (2) of the crime

2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment with labor for a period of ten months suspension, and two hours of community service order 120 hours) is too unreasonable. B. The prosecutor’s misunderstanding of facts (not guilty part of the lower judgment), even though the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the sales proceeds even if he received the goods, he/she obtained two copies of goods from the victim B and acquired them by deception.

The defendant's vindication that the victim's bags have lost during the transfer from China does not correspond to the common sense.

2 The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the facts stated in the first instance judgment.