The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of legal principles or misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant merely exchanged under the exchange method in the course of running an illegal money exchange business, and did not know at all that the amount deposited into the Defendant’s account was the money related to the Defendant’s loan, and the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case even though he did not conspired with the employees engaged in the singing fraud, there was an error of misapprehension of legal principles or misunderstanding of facts.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the defendant is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. The judgment of the court below on the assertion of misunderstanding legal principles or misunderstanding of facts also alleged the same as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the court below acknowledged the fact that the defendant conspired with G et al. and engaged in the acquisition of money from the victims as a book for delivery or exchange of money in order and impliedly, on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In full view of the above judgment of the court below after closely examining the records of this case and considering the following facts and circumstances recognized by the court below and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the judgment of the court below is acceptable, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding of legal principles or misunderstanding of facts.

① On January 16, 2017, after the date and time stated in the facts constituting the instant crime, the Defendant was accompanied at the time when he was present at the Sungdong Police Station in connection with the account used by the Defendant at the time of returning.

In addition, the defendant did not notify the fact that he received money from Q in the process of the above investigation, and even though he knew of the fact that the money was received from Q from Q in the above temporary light of the date and time, he traded with Q Q.