The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant B and C shall be reversed.

Defendant

B Imprisonment for one year, and Defendant C for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B 1’s violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act by mistake of facts-transfer of the means of access only lost the means of access, such as the passbook of a national bank account as stated in this part of the facts charged, and even though not intentionally transferred it, the judgment of the court below convicting Defendant B of the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act by the transfer of the means of access is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts. 2) The sentence of imprisonment (one year and four months) sentenced by the court below to Defendant B is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C1) misunderstanding the facts and aiding and abetting fraud - Defendant C was aware that the account under the name of K was used for the illegal sports gambling and did not know that it was used for the crime of this case’s telephone financial fraud, and there was no intention to commit the crime of aiding and abetting fraud. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting Defendant C of this part of the charges is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts. 2) The punishment sentenced by the court of unfair sentencing by the court of unfair sentencing (one year and four months of imprisonment and two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

C. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts- Defendant A’s not guilty portion of the means of access to the account under the name of theO was aware or predicted at the time when Defendant A arranged for the acquisition of the means of access to the account under the name of theO, and thus, it should be deemed that the above Defendant had the criminal intent to commit the crime of aiding and abetting fraud. Nevertheless, the lower court’s judgment not guilty of this part of the charges of aiding and abetting fraud was erroneous by misapprehending the facts. (2) In so doing, the lower court’s judgment on not guilty of the charges of aiding and abetting was erroneous by misapprehending the facts. (2) The punishment sentenced to each of the above punishments sentenced to Defendant B and C and the punishment sentenced to Defendant A (one hundred

2. Determination

A. The following facts are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts.