The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the defense counsel submitted on February 1, 2021 after the lapse of the period in which the appeal was not timely filed, to the extent that it supplements legitimate grounds for appeal.

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) The Defendant was aware of the fact that he received and delivered the money on a part-time basis, and did not know that he was involved in the criminal act of licensing fraud, and there was no intention of fraud.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the charge of attempted fraud is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles.

2) As seized evidence No. 1 cell phone calls were stored, contact numbers cannot be made without any mobile phone, it is too harsh to confiscate the mobile phone.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which sentenced the forfeiture of subparagraph 1 of seized evidence is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

가. 고의가 없었다는 주장에 대한 판단 피고인은 원심에서 이 부분 항소 이유와 동일한 주장을 하였고, 원심은 ① 보이스 피 싱 범죄가 비교적 오랜 기간 지속되어 왔고, 언론매체 등을 통해 국내 뿐 아니라 외국에도 알려 져 있는 점, ② 피고인이 수행한 업무는 단순히 돈을 전달하는 것임에도 보수가 과다한 점, ③ 피고인은 성명 불상자 와의 위 챗 대화내용을 여러 번 삭제하였고, 성명 불상자의 지시에 따라 여권을 영등포 역 물품보관함에 넣어 두고 동대구까지 KTX를 타고 이동하였는데, 이러한 지시 과정이 상당히 비정상적임에도 피고인은 성명 불상자의 신분, 일의 적법성에 대하여 별다른 확인을 하지 않고 지시에 따른 점, ④ 피고인의 주장처럼 도박자금을 전달하는 일이라면 직접 전달하거나 계좌 이체방법으로 처리할 수 있으므로,...