The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal No. 1: The defendant is merely a person who received money from G and H, the client for referral, and simply delivered money to I, or merely delivered I as the broker, to the victim of the crime of fraud and defense violation, which constitutes a crime of violation of Article 111(1) of the Defense Act against the defendant.

Part 2: The defendant has not conspiredd with I to commit a violation of the law by mistake or misunderstanding of the legal principles concerning the public recruitment relationship with I.

In relation to E and F’s case of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims (Special Rape) (hereinafter “instant case”), the Defendant was finally determined as a victim of the crime of fraud and defense judicial violation in the final and conclusive judgment of I in the criminal case against I, but the lower court, in collusion with I, received a total of KRW 412.5 million under the pretext of solicitation for the case or affairs handled by a public official.

In recognition, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the probative value of a final and conclusive judgment in a criminal case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Part 3: misunderstanding the legal principles on the scope of acceptance of money and valuables in violation of the Attorney-at-law law, even if the defendant is found to have violated the law, 2.48.5 million won, which was delivered to I out of the amount of KRW 412.5 million received from the clients, is merely delivered to or acquired by I, and thus, there is a violation of the law of defense only for the remaining KRW 164.0 million.

The court below determined that the offense of violation of the defense law against the whole amount of KRW 412,500,000,000,000 which was received from the clients was established. Such judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles as to Article 111, Paragraph 1 of the defense law, which affected the conclusion

Point 4: Punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, additional collection of 164 million won) is too unlimited.