All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts: (a) the Defendant heard from the person who is the chief of the J division of “V”, “V must receive investment in real estate in Hong Kong and remit money to Korea; (b) use another person’s account for saving money; and (c) trust the horses of the above J after searching the company’s website through the Internet; and (d) withdrawn money deposited in the Defendant’s account in accordance with the above J’s direction and gave birth to a male under his name. As the Defendant was unable to contact as to whether to employ the company from the above J on the following day, the Defendant found the Defendant at the police station that he was not involved in the so-called “Sishing.” Therefore, at the time of committing the instant crime, there was no doluous perception that the Defendant was involved in the “Sishing” crime. Nevertheless, at the time of the instant crime, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of unjust sentencing by deeming that there was an intentional act committed by the Defendant at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances revealed by each evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, ① the Defendant went together with his accomplice (hereinafter referred to as the “J chief”) on the day of the instant crime, and withdrawn KRW 5,658,000 out of KRW 5,798,00,000 deposited in the account 2 group of the Defendant’s bank accounts in Mapo-gu Seoul and one cash payment instrument in Jung-gu, Seoul, and ② the accomplice who directed the Defendant to withdraw cash is waiting outside of the bank.