The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant alleged a misunderstanding of facts did not provide D with KRW 60 million, and D voluntarily withdrawn funds borrowed under the name of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”), and the Defendant was unaware of this.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which recognized the defendant's crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes is erroneous.

B. The court below's decision on the grounds of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the first instance court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as alleged by the Defendant, on the ground that the Defendant, under the name of C, provided KRW 600,000 from the financial institution C to D a total of KRW 600,000,000,000 from the financial institution

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

1. The Defendant received KRW 600 million from the investigative agency on December 12, 2008 pursuant to the agreement with D and used it. The above KRW 600 million was paid by D to D for the purpose of acquiring stocks for joint management with it. Around July 2009, D agreed upon KRW 1.4 billion in the end, i.e., taking a loan with his/her own collateral and deducting D’s collateral with his/her own collateral, and having borrowed KRW 200 million as collateral and paid KRW 600 million in total to D for the purpose of returning the investment deposit. In particular, D made a statement to the effect that D was given a loan with the said KRW 600 million under the pretext of returning the investment deposit.