The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The accused shall disclose the summary of the judgment of innocence.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, although the facts alleged by the Defendant were not false facts, and even if false facts were to be false, the lower court, even if there were grounds to believe the Defendant as true facts, and thus, dismissed illegality under Article 310 of the Criminal Act as related to public interest, omitted judgment on such facts.

(b) Sentencing (the court below's judgment: 2 million won)

2. A prosecutor who made an ex officio determination at the trial of the court below applied for amendments to the indictment, which read “I did not have, despite the absence of 4,00 won” among the facts charged in the court below, “I did not request the defendant or any other person to issue a receipt equivalent to KRW 30,000,000 at the time of requesting the printing of KRW 3,000,000,000,” and it was changed by a party member who

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained, but the defendant's mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of official authority.

3. Determination as to the misapprehension of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. The facts charged (the charges corrected by the prosecutor at the fifth trial date of the trial) are as follows: (a) the Defendant visited B as “G” and operated as “F”, and (b) the Defendant did not have any talked about KRW 30 million for the support payments of tinsan-U.S. sports enterprises in the E-U.S. in the E-U.S. restaurant; and (c) although the Defendant requested another person to issue receipts equivalent to KRW 30 million at the request of printing the amount of KRW 3 million, the Defendant did not request another person to issue receipts at KRW 30 million on May 5, 2016, the Defendant requested “G” under the title “G, i.e., the misunderstanding related to the mountain, which would be at issue, KRW 30 million,” and requested receipts at KRW 30 million.

Does the F have refused the request; and

The phrase “” was posted, and on January 2016.