The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

Although the defendant did not deceiving the victim of mistake, the judgment of the court below that convicted the defendant of the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of the fact and affected the judgment.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 120 hours of community service order) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

The above sentence of the court below is unfair because it is too unhued.

Judgment

On June 10, 201, the Defendant entered into a contract for removal of hydrogen factories and by-products related to hydrogen factories located in K at the time with M Co., Ltd. on June 10, 201, and on the same day, sold scrap metal, scrap metal, rain metals, electric wires, etc. (hereinafter “the instant scrap metal, etc.”) generated from the said removal to G on the same day.

10 million won was remitted from G on the same day.

On June 21, 2011, the Defendant: (a) sold the instant scrap metal in double form; (b) delivered the instant scrap metal to the victim with the intention or ability to transfer the instant scrap metal, etc.; and (c) made the phone call to the victim with the victim at a time in distress on June 21, 2011; (b) made the phone call to the victim at a low price; (c) made the scrap metal at a low price; (d) made the payment of KRW 200 million with the purchase price; and (e) acquired the instant scrap metal after completing the on-site adjustment at the time of advance payment, from the victim’s office around June 22, 201.

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by integrating the evidence presented in its judgment.

However, it is difficult to accept the judgment of the court below for the following reasons.

First of all, the seller of any article is related to the sale to the buyer.