The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles

Nevertheless, from June 30, 2008 to June 30, 2008 of the facts charged in the instant case

9. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the crime up to November 1 (the part on the crime No. 1 to No. 4 of the list of crimes attached to the judgment of the court below) was erroneous, or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court (three years of suspended sentence in one year and six months) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant alleged the same purport in the lower court’s determination as to the Defendant’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, and the lower court rejected the allegation in detail on the ground that the reasoning was stated in the part from 4th to 5th 10 of the judgment.

The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below and the court below, namely, the defendant was aware of the fact that E was engaged in multi-stage financial business even before a multi-stage fraud case was reported to the media on October 2008, and that E was punished for a significant amount of money, and E was asked the defendant to lend his name to enter into an investment contract with V around 2007, and upon requesting the defendant to change his name in order to enter into an investment contract with V, "the company money is invested in the company money, and the liquor tax is required in the future."

By stating to the purport that “the above KRW 2 billion was the funds of a multi-level corporation run by E, T.