The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts does not have any fact that the Defendant, as stated in the instant facts charged, by deceiving the victims by deceiving them, and by acquiring property or pecuniary benefits. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor, prior to the judgment on the ex officio judgment, the prosecutor applied for amendments to the indictment with the contents that “as of July 21, 201,” “as of July 20, 201,” “as of July 20, 201, the victim received 2.655 million won from the victim’s seat as vehicle repair cost,” and “as of July 20, 201, the victim obtained 2.655 million won as vehicle repair cost by allowing the victim to pay 2.65 million won as vehicle repair cost using credit card from the seat.” Since this court was subject to the judgment by permitting this, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of facts.

B. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below's decision on the Defendant's assertion of mistake of facts in light of the records, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged of this case, by deceiving the victims with the intention of deceitation and by acquiring property or property benefits, has sufficiently recognized the fact that the Defendant acquired property or acquired property benefits. Therefore, this part of the

3. Accordingly, the court below's decision on the ground of ex officio reversal as above is based on Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant and prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing.