The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted in mistake of facts, the defendant can be deemed to have concealed criminal proceeds in violation of the relevant statutes.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, 120 hours of community service order, and 100 million won of collection) is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. On November 6, 2009, the Defendant concealed criminal proceeds, etc. for the purpose of pretending to be legitimately acquired as property acquired by the Defendant by depositing in the borrowed account under the name of Korean bank I used by the Defendant, which is part of KRW 500,000,000,000 from E, in connection with the intermediation of matters belonging to public officials’ duties, as stated in the facts of the crime in the judgment below, as stated in the judgment below.

B. In full view of the following circumstances, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that: (a) the Defendant deposited the said money into the said account that he/she used in his/her daily life as ordinary time and it is difficult to recognize the intent or intent to conceal criminal proceeds.

① The time of opening the above bank account in the name of I was April 16, 2009, and the payment of the price (3.4 million won around November 2009, around 3.8 million won around December 2009, around 3.8 million won around December 2009, and around 3.6 million won around January 201, 2010) in the name of the Defendant’s various public charges and the Defendant’s use of the Defendant, and the payment of the price of Samsung F&M (M) in the above account was made in the above account. On the other hand, it was time when the attraction of the Foreign Manpower Support Center in the Decision was confirmed on July 2009 and it was found that the Defendant used the above account as its own account.

② Of KRW 100 million received by the Defendant, only five million was deposited into the said account.

(3) The defendant has used the above borrowed name account in preparation for compulsory execution, etc. by the obligees because of a large debt at the time.