The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the legal principles) and the Defendant Company D (hereinafter “ABD”) did not have any existing obligation against the victim at the time of joint issuance of the instant promissory note. The victim decided to waive KRW 100 million out of the claim against the J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ABB”) (hereinafter “ABB”) with respect to the closure of the business, and the Defendant issued the instant promissory note ( state) D and the Defendant’s issuance of the instant promissory note.

Therefore, in order to have the maturity of the existing debt extended, the promissory note of this case was not issued, but a new debt is imposed.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case that the Promissory Notes were issued in order to have the maturity of the existing obligation extended. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's authority, the prosecutor applied for permission to modify the indictment as follows (the judgment in writing) in the trial of the court below. Since this court's permission changes the subject of the judgment, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

The Defendant’s assertion of mistake or misunderstanding of the legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the existence of the above ground for reversal of authority, and this is examined below.

B. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding factual misunderstanding or misapprehension of legal doctrine, namely, ① the Defendant’s issuance of promissory notes with the amount of KRW 120,000,000,000, which was partially collected by the victim, although the transportation cost to be paid to the victim was limited to KRW 120,000,000,000.