The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error 1) The Defendant did not have conspiredd with D to commit any crime. The Defendant was unaware of D’s fraud and deception at all. Since the Defendant was requested to issue a payment guarantee letter stating that D’s debt to a third party was guaranteed, only he borrowed KRW 1 billion from the victim. If D deposits KRW 1 billion with B (hereinafter “B”) against the victim, it was unaware of the fact that D had not known that “the victim would prepare KRW 20 billion.”

Although the Defendant entered into a payment guarantee transaction agreement with B on April 21, 2017 with the name of N Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “N”), which issued KRW 170 billion, it is true that the Defendant did not offer real estate in B as security until now.

However, since the defendant requested the "written consent to use as a collateral" on May 27, 2017 and there are circumstances such as the absence of any subsequent demand for establishment of a collateral security, it shall be deemed that the defendant had no intention to acquire it.

3) Even if the Defendant participated in the crime of D, the degree of his participation is merely aiding and abetting. The Defendant merely perceived that D borrowed money from an unspecified person, and that B issued a payment guarantee to the unspecified person upon the Defendant’s introduction. B) The lower court’s imprisonment with labor (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination - The prosecutor who is subject to the adjudication following the changes in indictment requested the court to change the indictment as stated in the following facts constituting the crime, and this court allowed this to change the indictment subject to the adjudication.

Therefore, it is judged guilty of the facts charged before the amendment.