The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. At the time of appeal, the summary of the grounds for appeal presented by C to C, “I knew of the telephone at the Hand phone agency,” with the answer that “I would return the Defendant’s resident registration certificate and the credit card that I would return the Defendant’s use of the said card,” and that I would pay the Defendant the full amount of the Defendant’s resident registration certificate and the credit card. I did not agree with C to open a Handphone in the Defendant’s name.

Therefore, the complaint of this case against the defendant C is not false, and the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The judgment of the court below

A. The Defendant also asserted as the grounds for appeal, but the court below rejected the Defendant’s assertion and found the Defendant guilty of the above charges on the following grounds, taking into account the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined: “It is reasonable to view that the Defendant consented to the additional opening of the Handphone in his name after asking whether he consented to G of Handphone personnel.”

① On September 28, 2010, the Defendant confirmed that the victim had sexual intercourse with the Defendant’s resident registration certificate and credit card, forced the Defendant to buy handphones, and caused damages by opening handphones to be used by the Defendant under the Defendant’s name. However, on September 30, 2010, the Defendant respondeded that on September 30, 2010, when the victim received a phone call from an employee of the Handphone agency, he would know about the amount of damages to the Defendant, and that he did not know about the contents of the son’s license. However, it was correct for the Defendant to have done this act as an ordinary adult with the separation of the latter half of 50 parts at the time.