The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles merely expressed the victim's use of KRW 7.5 million to the victim, and there is no 7.5 million as stated in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and erroneous.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant’s reputation was damaged by pointing out false facts as indicated in the facts charged.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is just, and there is no error of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.

① At an investigative agency, E stated that “the Defendant was “the victim 7.5 million won drinking” and “the senior citizen center at the time 20 members were present” and testified to the same effect in the court of the original instance (the investigation record No. 69 pages, No. 70 of the trial record). ② G made a statement at an investigative agency that “the Defendant was “the Defendant 20 senior citizen center at the time” was “the 7.5 million senior citizen center at the time when there were 20 senior citizens,” and the Defendant testified to the same effect in the court of the original instance.

(Investigation Records, Nos. 77, 78 of the trial records). 3 The defendant submitted K's seal at the court below to the court below, and the contents are as follows: (a) there was a fact that the defendant stated "a 7.5 million won as to 7.5 million won", and that there was no fact that "a f.5 million won as to 7.5 million won as to f.5 million

(22 pages of the trial record). However, K does not have a seal affixed to the trial court “the letter of confirmation of the fact is not its own seal, and it does not have any record of the above confirmation.”