The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) Defendant’s prosecutor’s statement, etc., it is reasonable to see that the Defendant had dolusent awareness that his bank account was used for committing so-called “Sishing” crimes.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On June 2017, the summary of the facts charged of the instant case: (a) in order to facilitate the so-called telephone financial fraud fraud (hereinafter “ Bosing”), by misrepresenting the investigative agency using personal information collected by a person in an unsound manner, by misrepresenting him/her; (b) the Defendant, upon receiving contact that the money was deposited into the account through the Kakao Stockholm case from the person in an unsound name, withdrawn the money deposited into the relevant account and deliver it to the person in an unsound name, and received 20% of the money deposited in compensation as a precedent.

On June 19, 2017, the name influor was made by calls to victims C and misrepresenting them to the inspection of the Seoul District Public Prosecutor's Office in Seoul District Public Prosecutor's Office. "Influorial prosecution is made because there are three presidential bankbooks located in the name of the party, and the criminal abused them to put up a notice to the effect that the goods are sold in the Domarket, etc., and then the criminal suspect was a suspect.

A false statement was made to the effect that the remaining money can be used for a crime, and thus, the bank account in the name of a national bank account would be deposited into the bank account in the name of a national bank account. The victim was transferred KRW 6,100,000 to the national bank account (D) in the name of a defendant on the same day.

Accordingly, the defendant provided information to the above national bank account in the name of the defendant, and assisted the crime of fraud by allowing the victim to deposit money to the above account in the name of the defendant.

B. The lower court’s judgment is as indicated in its reasoning.