The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that from the date of this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court erred in the misapprehension of the legal doctrine and misunderstanding of the facts, on the part of the Defendant, committed an act of disposal by deceiving the victim of the telecommunications company on the user’s ability to pay the telecommunications fee and the end money and the end money and thereby transferring ownership of the mobile phone, since the telecommunications company has already supplied the mobile device to the agency before entering into an individual subscription contract between the telecommunications company and the mobile phone user, and only acquired ownership of the mobile device.

The court rendered a judgment of innocence on the grounds that it could not be seen.

However, as in the instant case, the fact that an entrusted agency in collusion with a sales store, etc. attracting subscribers to a small amount of loan, prepared an application for subscription, and immediately dispose of the mobile phone terminal to a third party, such as a smuggling exporter, etc., without delivering the mobile phone to the purchaser if subscription is made. In other words, if the damaged party knew that the mobile phone terminal is sold regardless of the use of telecommunications services, the victim would not sell and deliver the terminal in accordance with the consignment agency contract. As such, in full view of the whole, the relationship between the “act of submitting an application for subscription as if he did not make an application for a normal mobile phone subscription,” and the “act of delivering an application for subscription as if he did not pay the mobile phone price and the telecommunications fee,” can be acknowledged.

In addition, the court below found the defendant guilty only on the part of the agency, sales store, and the part of the confession which the defendant had operated or dealt with the opening business through the fraud of sales incentives, and on the part of the confession, it is difficult to recognize the defendant's involvement in the fraud of sales incentives through the opening of the mobile phone (the reason is that it is difficult to recognize the fact of the defendant's involvement.