The judgment of the court below (including the portion not guilty) shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and eight months.

In this case.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal 1) The Defendant (as to the conviction of the 2016 senior group 3566 of the judgment of the court below), as stated in this part of the facts charged, was accused of the victims, and received a total of KRW 1.4 million from them to the agricultural bank account under the name of the Defendant, and did not receive a total of KRW 61 million from the victims in cash.

2) The lower court determined that the statement protocol against the victim prepared by a judicial police officer was inadmissible as evidence by the prosecutor (1) misunderstanding the facts (as to the part not guilty of the lower judgment’s judgment regarding the fraud of KRW 10 million in cash against the victim P). However, in light of the fact that the victim submitted to the lower court prior to departure from the Republic of Korea a petition stating that the Defendant’s strict punishment is filed, and that international judicial cooperation is physically impossible, the admissibility of evidence should be recognized pursuant to Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

If other evidences submitted by the prosecutor are examined, it can be sufficiently convicted of this part of the facts charged.

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion 1) The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant, through the Internet in order to resolve the occurrence of approximately KRW 4-500 million liability due to failure to carry out Lestop projects, etc. in around 2014, he/she deceivings the general public as if he/she would receive corporate loans from the Thailand using information on overseas loans that had not already existed in around 2009, and acquired money as its expenses.

Therefore, on October 2015, the Defendant was called to request a victim C to introduce a loan product to a victim who became aware of in the course of providing counseling related to a company loan prior to a place where it is impossible to know Seoul (hereinafter referred to as Seoul) in early October 2015, and the victim can bring about KRW 500 million to a local bank in Thailand through this exhibition, and among them, KRW 150,000,000.