The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not deceiving the victim G.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case served as the representative director of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) who mainly established manufacturing, wholesale and retail business from around September 12, 2005.

The Defendant around September 24, 2015, at the F hotel Scar in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, the victim G, and “from October 1, 2015, 100 million won is added separately to D's total franchise, and until the end of September, 201, if the total franchise exceeds KRW 220 million, the Defendant paid KRW 100 million to the victim G.

At present, although the total number of sales in the border area is one, the total number of sales in No. 1(s) was operated by I.

However, if you enter into the Seoul Special Metropolitan City sales contract, which is the general board No. 2 in the border area of North Korea, the total sales contract will no longer be added to the border area in the future, and the total sales contract will be supplied to the agency only in the storage without store. When you supply cosmetics, etc. to the agency at 35% price of the consumer price. If you supply them to the agency at 50% price, there is about 15% price of the consumer price, which will be cut off.

H contractor's name, which operates a light board on July 2015, is J.

I would like to recognize the amount of 33,00,000,000,000,000,000,000 won, which is already paid to the U.S. agency.

Since the internal organ is the chairperson of D, the internal organ and the details of transfer are the trust of the contract and transfer of the total amount of the purchase price by transferring it. Accordingly, the company will publicize it on a large scale and invite the agency.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, in fact, the Defendant applied for deliberation of a franchise agreement to the Fair Trade Commission to change the method of “franchis franchise store” to supply consumer goods to 50% of the consumer goods in the manner of “total sales agency and agency” around August 2015.