The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the aiding and abetting fraud 1), the Defendant only affixed a seal on the sub-lease contract that E prepared in advance and did not know that E received the premium from the damaged party, there was no intention of the principal offender to obtain the premium by fraud.

2) As to the act of injury and assault, the Defendant was unable to walk properly without walking at the time of aging, and thus, the Defendant could not inflict an injury or assault on the victim.

3) Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or misapprehending the legal principles, which found all of the facts charged in this case guilty.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of four million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to aiding and abetting fraud 1)

① In other words, the Defendant was well aware of the fact that the merchants in the Bupyeong Market were not selling the premium without receiving the premium, ② the Defendant was aware that E was trying to sell the premium of KRW 70 million prior to entering into the contract with the victim, ③ upon requesting the Defendant to conclude a sublease contract, E made a speech, such as “I do not have money, and send a food to the university.”

According to the above facts, E could sufficiently be aware that E succeeds to the sub-lease contract on coffee in order to receive the premium, so the Defendant was aware that E was paid the premium from the injured party.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

2) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below including the statements of the victim and witness in relation to the act of injury and assault, the defendant was on June 2016.