The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The misunderstanding of the legal doctrine did not know the fact that the Defendant had been prosecuted against the victimized person immediately before returning home, and thus was in Vietnam with the aim of escaping criminal punishment.

Since the instant facts charged cannot be readily concluded, the statute of limitations has expired on March 28, 2014.

B. The Defendant did not personally use the money remitted from the injured party, and paid the money to the customer as the price for creation as explained by the injured party, but was able to work in the middle.

J has no intention to deceive the victim as it was lockedly damaged by J.

(c)

Sentencing unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. According to Article 253(3) of the Criminal Procedure Act, where an offender stays abroad in order to escape criminal punishment, the statute of limitations shall be suspended during that period.

In order to suspend the statute of limitations, the “purpose of escaping criminal punishment” should be recognized. Here, the “purpose of escaping criminal punishment” is not limited to the sole purpose of staying in a foreign country, but it is sufficient that the term “purpose of escaping criminal punishment” is included in several overseas stay purposes of the offender.

In a case where the offender located abroad was a tool to escape criminal punishment, “the purpose of escape from criminal punishment” was “the purpose of escape from criminal punishment.

It can be seen that “the purpose of escaping criminal punishment” continues to exist during the period of overseas stay unless there exist any objective circumstances clearly expressing the subjective intent of an offender, which is incompatible with the “purpose of escaping criminal punishment” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do2510, Jun. 27, 2013). In addition, the period of prescription for the relevant crime; the background leading up to the circumstance in which the offender is unable to return to Korea; and the period in which such circumstances continue to exist, is the period of prescription for the relevant crime.