The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, even though the Defendant merely provided a loan at the time of the misunderstanding of the facts, and did not have an intention to assist the crime of fraud by facilitating the crime of the imprisoned person with no name.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the observation of protection, and the community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the assertion of mistake of fact 1) Since aiding and abetting under the Criminal Act refers to direct and indirect act that facilitates the commission of a principal offender with the knowledge that the principal offender is committing a crime, the so-called aiding and abetting the commission of the principal offender and the principal offender’s act that constitutes an act that constitutes an act that satisfies the requirements for the composition of the principal offender.

However, inasmuch as such intent is an in-depth fact, in a case where a defendant denies it, it is inevitable to prove indirect facts having considerable relevance with an intention given the nature of an object. In such a case, what constitutes indirect facts having considerable relevance with an intention should be determined based on normal empirical rule, and there is no other way to reasonably determine the link of facts by using a close observation or analysis power.

In addition, in the case of assistive crime, the intention of the principal offender is not required to be aware of the specific contents of the crime realized by the principal offender, but it is sufficient to dolusence or predictability (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do6056, Apr. 29, 2005). 2) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the judgment of the court below convicting the facts charged of this case is just and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.