The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, misunderstanding the legal principles, was involved in the lease contract of a warehouse to be used as a game site before commencing the game site business of this case and informed of various experiences and know-hows about the operation of the game site. However, there was no distribution of the proceeds of the game site of this case from C or any price for the operation of the game site, and there was no refusal to receive a proposal on the joint operation of the game site, and thus, there was a functional control over the Defendant by sharing the intent of joint processing and the role of the principal offender.

As such, the Defendant is not a joint principal offender but a joint principal offender.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant as a joint principal offender is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment of the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles 1) Joint principals under Article 30 of the Criminal Act commit a crime jointly with two or more persons. In order for joint principal offenders to be established, it is necessary to have committed a crime through a functional control by a joint doctor, which is a subjective element, and the joint principal offender’s intent is to jointly engage in a specific criminal act with another person’s intent, and to shift his/her own intent by using another person’s act. Such joint principal intention is insufficient to recognize another person’s criminal act but not to restrain it. However, there is a mutual understanding that each accomplice does not necessarily constitute a prior conspiracy of a criminal plan, and it is sufficient that each accomplice is able to share an act in essence relating to the constituent elements.

The intention of such joint processing is recognized.