The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

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

40 hours per the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, and aiding and abetting the fraud related to “F” (A) the Defendant did not know at all the circumstances that the transferor of the documents related to the legal entity was using the documents to use them for the commission of the phishing crime. As such, the Defendant did not have the intention to aid and abetting the fraud.

(B) Since the Defendant violated the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, in order to establish transaction performance in order to meet the loan qualification requirements, issued access media to unspecified persons, and the Defendant was to receive a return at the time of loan progress, there was no intention to transfer access media.

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one and half years of imprisonment, and forty hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the prosecutor’s (1) misunderstanding the facts (A) and the fact that a public electronic record, etc. related to “F of a limited company,” and the fact that a public electronic record, etc. related to “F of a limited company,” E is consistently stated that “a corporation was established through the defendant,” and that R was only the defendant at the time of the establishment of the corporation, and that the defendant was an expert in the establishment of the corporation, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(B) The lower court did not specifically state the grounds for innocence as to this part of the relevant aiding and abetting Co., Ltd. related to fraud, and found the Defendant not guilty of aiding and abetting the crime of fraud by delivering documents related to the corporation to the phishing organization while recognizing the fact that the Defendant participated in the establishment of the corporation. Therefore, the content of the aiding and abetting Co., Ltd

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination on the Defendant’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. Related to “Limited Company F”.