The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Since a final appeal is a follow-up trial on the decision of the appellate court, matters not subject to a review in the appellate court are not different from the scope of the trial in the final appeal, and thus, a ground other than those for which the defendant did not claim in the appellate court as the grounds for appeal or the appellate court decides ex officio

(2) In light of the records, the court of first instance found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that there is no proof of crime as to the fraud of KRW 50 million and KRW 150 million on May 30, 2012, and KRW 200 million on the ground that there is no proof of crime, and the remaining facts charged as to the fraud of KRW 267,04,00 and the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act were all convicted and sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years of imprisonment. The Defendant appealed after the appeal of the court of first instance, and the prosecutor appealeded the above part of the charges, on the ground that there was a mistake of facts and unfair sentencing as to the aforementioned part of the charges. The court of first instance acquitted the Defendant on the grounds that there was no proof of crime, and found the Defendant guilty on the part of the charges as to the fraud of KRW 267,04,000 and the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act. The judgment of the court of first instance was reversed and acquitted.

In such a case, the defendant cannot be viewed as the ground for appeal that there was an error in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence against the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) or in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the joint principal offense of fraud, as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), with the exception of the total of KRW 50 million,00,000,000,000 and KRW 2.67,044,000,000,000, which was judged additionally guilty on May 30, 2012.

b) the Commission;