The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the summary of the grounds for appeal (as to the 2016 Highest 2694 case), and by misunderstanding the victim D only used the defendant, and without deceiving the victim, and by misunderstanding the facts, and by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the relation with the deception, the criminal intent of deception, and the criminal intent of

The punishment of the court below (three years of suspended execution in January and August, and 80 hours of community service order) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake and misunderstanding of the legal doctrine, the Defendant deceptioned the victim as stated in this part of the facts charged.

Since it can be sufficiently recognized, the defendant's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) was under consultation with H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) that was authorized to participate in the instant public performance (hereinafter “the instant public performance”) and the Defendant decided to invite investors instead of gaining profits by participating in the instant public performance, while entering into the agreement with H on January 20, 2014 with the Defendant on the joint promotion agreement (hereinafter “B”) (Evidence 2694 evidence records (hereinafter in this paragraph “Evidence”) with the Defendant, on April 4, 2014, and the Defendant did not pay the amount of money to the Defendant, while entering into the agreement with H on February 4, 2014 with the Defendant to participate in the public performance of this case, and on the other hand, the Defendant did not pay the amount of money to the Defendant, i.e., the victim of the instant public performance (hereinafter “B”).