The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

except that from the date of this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant committed the instant crime by mistake of facts (as to the part of acquittal in the original trial), constitutes a “defensive scheme” in the obstruction of business by deceptive means, and thereby, there was a risk that the victim company’s business will be obstructed.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(b) The sentencing division and police officer (one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution);

2. Determination

A. As to the fraud which the court below found guilty among the facts charged in the instant case, the prosecutor ex officio judgment (as to the conviction in the original conviction), he applied for an amendment to the indictment, which changed the amount obtained by deception from “52,121,816 won” to “46,673,816 won” as stated in the facts charged in the judgment below, and since this court permitted this and changed to the subject of the judgment, the conviction portion in the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

B. As to the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts (as to the part of acquittal), the lower court (as to the charge of fraud in this case), with regard to the charge of obstruction of business that "the Defendant interfered with the adequacy or fairness of the business of paying expenses for the amount of OD (ODR) to ordinary members and the sales and publicity activities on behalf of the victim's goods, etc. by deceptive means, by means of a method that would be applied to various purchases by the victim, such as the crime of fraud in this case," "the crime of interference with business" in the crime of obstruction by deceptive means means means means means that the perpetrator misleads the other party, makes him/her a mistake or site to achieve the purpose of the act, and uses it. In this case, even if there was a risk that the victim's sales and publicity activities on behalf of the victim's goods, etc. are restricted due to the Defendant's fraudulent act, it is only based on the result of the victim's