The appeal by the prosecutor against the judgment of the first instance and the appeal by the prosecutor against the judgment of the second instance are all dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The first lower court’s judgment (public prosecutor) recognized the Defendant’s victim I as intimidation, the Defendant’s violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, etc., and found the Defendant’s imprisonment (five million won of fine) so far as it is too uneasible.

B. Article 2 (1) of the judgment of the court below (1) 2 of the defendant hearing that the defendant would make a loan by raising the transaction performance from the scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam s

The punishment sentenced by the court below (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(2) The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. The first instance court sentenced the fine and the second instance court sentenced the imprisonment, respectively, and the arguments in each appeal case against the first and second lower judgment were combined in the appellate court. However, the arguments in the appellate court were combined in case where each of the lower court’s punishments is different as imprisonment with prison labor and a fine.

Even though the appellate court can maintain each sentence sentenced by the court below, and it does not necessarily require a sentence of the same kind. Thus, the appellate court does not reverse the judgment below's own authority on each of the appeals cases of the combined cases, but determines the appeal against each of the original judgments as follows.

As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts against the judgment of the second instance, the second instance court rejected the Defendant’s assertion in detail under the title “determination on the Defendant’s and his defense counsel’s assertion of fraudulent aiding and abetting” in the judgment of the second instance, which is the same as the mistake of facts among the grounds for appeal of this case. This case’s assertion is based on the circumstances such as the statement recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the second instance court. In other words, it is recognized by these evidence.