The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. Fact-misunderstanding, misunderstanding of legal principles did not take part in the crime of the attached Table 2, No. 6, and No. 3 committed before lending the name of the lessee of the “AR” office, which was used as the place for the crime of the fraud of this case at B around July 2017 upon B’s request. In the case of the crime of the attached Table 4, No. 5, 6, and 8, the Defendant borrowed the name of the lessee of the above office in the name of the above office and received KRW 50,00 per day between five months in return for cleaning, diameter, etc. at the above office, and arranged the loan at the request of B, and received KRW 10-200,000 per commission from the lending company, and then the relevant crime was committed as a joint principal offender.

It can not be seen as a crime of aiding and abetting, but only served as a crime of aiding and abetting.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found all of the facts charged guilty is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

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

Judgment

A. 1) Determination of the misapprehension of the legal principle on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principle

Even if there are two or more persons, a public contest relationship is established if a combination of doctors is made successively or implicitly between them, and even those who did not directly participate in the act of implementation should be held liable as a joint principal offender for the act of another person (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Do3483, Nov. 10, 200). In the case of a joint principal offender, a joint principal offender is aware of another person’s crime and thus, a joint principal offender is recognized.