The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The amount that the defendant received from D is not KRW 13.5 million but KRW 12.5 million.

The above KRW 12.5 million is not received in return for legal affairs, but borrowed.

Defendant did not handle legal affairs.

In other words, it is nothing more than the completion of a written complaint for elderly D, and it is nothing more than that of D's statement in lieu of D's statement by attending the police and the prosecutor's office as a person of trust relationship with D, and it is nothing more than introducing D's lawyer to D.

The punishment sentenced by the court below of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment with labor for six months, one year of suspended execution, and additional collection) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

For the following reasons, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

In full view of the following facts and circumstances recognized by the court below based on the evidence duly examined by the defendant, the defendant's money received from D is recognized as constituting 13.5 million won.

D stated that the investigative agency had consistently offered 13,500,000 won to the defendant in substitution from the investigative agency to the original trial.

The Defendant, on January 20, 2017, issued to D a loan certificate of KRW 11.5 million, KRW 1 million as of April 17, 2017, KRW 1 million as of April 17, 2017, and KRW 2 million as of June 19, 2017.

The Defendant asserted that, on January 20, 2017, the Defendant received only KRW 11.5 million from the loan certificate as of April 17, 2017, and KRW 1.0 million from the loan certificate as of April 17, 2017, and not from the receipt as of June 19, 2017, the Defendant prepared the receipt as of June 19, 2017, not from the receipt as of June 201, D prepared the documents to be shown to his/her own wife and his/her father, and that the claim of KRW 12.5 million against the Defendant is also supported the Defendant’s assertion.

However, the above loan certificate or receipt was not prepared at the time when the defendant received money, but was prepared for a considerable period of time after receiving money, and the above loan certificate is a part of the attorney fees (2,000,000 won) for the case E-at-law in which the complaint was filed against H and I.