The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There was no intention to commit the crime by deceiving the accused of the fact.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant alleged the same purport as the grounds for appeal on this part of the judgment below, and the court below rejected the above assertion and found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case by clearly explaining the judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts.

Examining the judgment of the court below and the court below in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant in the judgment below.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. The sentencing of a judgment on an unfair assertion of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, and the discretionary judgment that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing as prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). The lower court is sufficiently responsible for all the circumstances regarding the sentencing of the Defendant.