The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) The Defendant, as indicated in the judgment of the court below, did not sell phiphones to B by deducting 20,000 won from the money borrowed from B as set forth in the [Attachment 3] No. 2-A of the crime committed in the judgment of the court below, as set forth in the [Attachment 3-5] No. 3 of the crime committed in the judgment of the court below.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below as to Defendant A’s assertion of mistake, Defendant A’s sales of 20,000 won from the money borrowed from B, such as the No. 3 through No. 5 of the annexed crime list 2-A in the judgment of the court below, can be sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion of mistake is without merit.

1) B purchased philophones at the investigative agency on June 2016 and around November 201, 2016 by means of deducting KRW 20,000 from the money lent to the above Defendant at least two times, and then deducting KRW 20,000 from the money lent to the above Defendant from the first patrol officer on February 2017.

“The statement was made to the effect that “........”

2) Defendant A, at an investigative agency, received two instances of phiphones from the said Defendant on June 2016, and around November 201, 2016. Defendant A purchased the phiphones at the said Defendant on the first half of February 2017, the first half of February 2017, the second half of February 2017, and the first half of March 2017, the first half of March 201, and the second half of March 2017.

(E)The answer to the purport that “other parts” are not all true and not paid in cash, but in the form of deducting from the money that should be repaid.

“The statement was made”.

3) B) In the first instance court, “The above defendant at the beginning of 2016” is KRW 6 million.