The judgment below

The part of the defendant B, excluding the compensation order against the defendant B, shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be sentenced to two years of imprisonment;

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

A misunderstanding of facts [2012 Highest 2607, 3245] In the case of the above defendant B, the court below erred in misunderstanding of facts as to each of the facts charged, even though the defendant received the check paper from the bank party and the above defendant B with the rubber and the corporate leader as the defendant B made, and even though the above defendant B did any substantial act, the court below convicted him of each of the facts charged.

[2012 Highest 3542] As mentioned above in the case, the check paper is possessed by both the defendant Eul and the defendant Eul, and as a result of the lack of deposit, the defendant must file a complaint that the check used by the defendant Eul was altered. Thus, the defendant prepared a complaint with the defendant in his name and submitted it to the police station, but the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the charge.

[2013 Highest 50] In the case, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged without having conducted a private monetary transaction with S and not a lending act as “business”. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

[2013 Highest 2066] In the case, the defendant did not know the victim AH, and the upper defendant B, regardless of the defendant's intention, committed a substantial act under the upper defendant B, such as preparing a sales contract with the victim AH in the name of the defendant, receiving a loan, but the court below found the defendant guilty. In so determining, the court below erred by mistake of facts.

[2013 Highest 4981] As to the case, BC and the defendant B are engaged in a transaction with the victim E, and the defendant did not issue and deliver a check of shares to the victim E, and the defendant B and the defendant B received a discount of promissory notes or the check of shares from the victim E.