The judgment below

The remainder other than the confiscated part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was unaware of the nationality of Malaysia, and thus did not intend to jointly process an alien, which is the requisite for the establishment of a co-principal.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of all the facts charged of this case on the ground that the defendant acquired money from the victims or stolen money in collusion with the victim. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (a long-term three years and four months of imprisonment, a short-term three years of imprisonment, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below on the grounds of appeal by the defendant ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by authority, and the record reveals that the defendant fell under the "juvenile" under Article 2 of the Juvenile Act at the time when the judgment of the court below was rendered on November 18, 2000, and thus, the defendant was sentenced to an irregular term of imprisonment. However, it is apparent that at the time of the judgment of the court below, it would no longer fall under the "Juvenile" under the age of 19. Thus, the judgment of the court below that sentenced the defendant to an irregular term of imprisonment was no longer

However, even if there are such reasons for ex officio destruction, the above argument of mistake of facts by the defendant is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

B. Article 30 of the Criminal Act provides that two or more co-principals of Article 30 of the Criminal Act regarding the assertion of mistake of facts jointly commit a crime. In order to constitute a co-principal, the crime is required to be committed through the functional control by the co-principal by the intention of co-processing, which is a subjective requirement, and the intention of co-principal is to be integrated for committing a specific criminal act with the intention of co-principal, and to move to the execution of one's own will by using another's act

Supreme Court Decision 201No. 901 delivered on November 9, 2001