The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles: Although the Defendant was not an attorney-at-law even though he was to handle P’s legal affairs, 73 million won out of 91.3 million won paid by P was paid for value added, stamp, service charge, and other actual expenses. As such, money and valuables received in return for the handling of legal affairs (=9.13 million won - 73 million won) are limited to 18 million won.

Therefore, the defendant received 90,300,000 won from P in return for handling legal affairs.

In light of the above, the judgment of the court below that recognized the establishment of a crime of violation of the defense justice within the scope of this, and collected the above amount from the defendant, is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts, or in the misunderstanding of legal principles as to the "gold goods" after Article 109 subparagraph 1 and Article 116 of the Defense Act, which affected the conclusion

B. Sentencing: even if the instant facts charged are all convicted, the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment, additional collection 90,13 million won) is too unreasonable.

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

A. Article 109 Subparag. 1 of the Defense Act provides for penal provisions regarding the act of legal affairs in which a person, other than an attorney-at-law, receives or promises to receive money, valuables, entertainment or other benefits. However, when the person is simply reimbursed for actual expenses related to legal affairs, he/she received benefits under the aforementioned provision.

shall not be deemed to exist.

However, the above Article aims to prohibit a person, other than an attorney-at-law, from performing legal affairs for a fee, and thus, in full view of various circumstances, such as the content of legal affairs, details and scale of expenses, and the process of giving and receiving profits, he/she acquired economic benefits in return for legal affairs.

If it can be seen, even if the profit amount takes the form of reimbursement for actual expenses, the act of receiving such profit and performing legal affairs constitutes a crime of violation of defense law.

At this time, some expenses have been disbursed.