The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although there was a fact that the Defendant attempted mechanical work for Co-Defendant B in an irregular manner for Co-Defendant B, the Defendant did not commit a violation of the Bank of Korea Act in collusion with B, since there was no fact that invested funds or assisted technical aspects.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (nine months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts, a public invitation of two or more persons of the relevant legal principles to jointly process a crime is not required under the law, but is sufficient if there is an implied communication on the joint implementation between the accomplices who intend to jointly implement the crime directly or indirectly, and there is no direct evidence, it may be recognized by the circumstantial facts and empirical rules. Furthermore, the joint implementation of a crime by public invitation is possible without the premise that all the accomplices realize the elements of the crime, and it is possible to cooperate with the accomplices who conduct the realization of the crime to strengthen the decision on the act (Supreme Court Decision 2010Do2905 Decided April 26, 2012). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the following facts are acknowledged. (A) Co-defendant G of the court below, “Defendant 10 won china,” who supplied the Defendant 1 to the investigation agency and supplied the Defendant 100 china,” and “The Defendant supplied the Defendant 201 china,” who supplied it to the Defendant 2014.