The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It is merely a non-performance of civil liability in the continuous transactional relationship alleged by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, and there is no intention to defraud the accused.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

The prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment in exchange for part of the facts charged at the trial court, and the subject of the trial by this court's permission, so the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

B. We examine the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine.

With respect to the grounds for ex officio investigation, the court of appeals shall judge without necessary review whether the grounds for appeal are submitted if the appeal is lawful, or whether the grounds for appeal are included in the statement of reasons for appeal. However, with respect to those other than the grounds for ex officio investigation, it may be subject to the trial only if they are included in the statement of reasons for appeal submitted within the prescribed period, unless they are stated in the petition of appeal or not. However, even if they are not included in the statement of reasons which affect the conclusion of the judgment, it may be tried ex officio even if they are not included in the statement of reasons for appeal. Meanwhile, even if the defendant or defense counsel states

Nor can it be viewed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Do1234, Sept. 22, 1998). According to the records, the Defendant submitted a written reason for appeal stating only unfair sentencing on February 19, 2016 after receiving the notice of receipt of the records of trial from this court, and the reasons for appeal are as follows.