The judgment below

The part concerning the accused case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

except that this judgment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant is that the sentence of the court below which sentenced the defendant 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor is too unreasonable with respect to the guilty part of the judgment of the court below, and the summary of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is about the acquittal part of the judgment of the court below, and the judgment of the court below which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misconception

2. Regarding the prosecutor's grounds for appeal

A. Of the acquitted portion of the lower judgment, on February 12, 2013, the summary of the facts charged and the summary of the lower judgment’s determination (A) are as follows.

On August 2012, the Defendant, at the H office of the G organization located in Songpa-gu Seoul F 602, said that “The victim E (the 54-year-old-old-old-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based--based-based-based-based-based-based-based-

However, the Defendant was not in the position of the head of G organization H at that time, and did not have any authority with respect to the purchase of the said non-performance metals and the operation of the business conference of G organization. Even if the Defendant received money from the victim for a non-payment purpose, he did not actually use it for the victim or have no intention or ability to engage in activities for the purchase of the non-performance metals.

Nevertheless, on February 12, 2013, the Defendant had the victim purchase telecommunication lines removed from KT at the coffee shop in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gwangjin-gu, and had the victim purchase it, and had the victim make it possible to purchase it from J organizations and G organizations. Accordingly, the Defendant had the victim make a full payment.