Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. According to the records of the judgment on the Defendant’s appeal, the Defendant did not submit a written reason for appeal within the period for submission of the written reason for appeal, and did not state the reason for appeal in the petition of appeal, and the Defendant’s counsel submitted a written reason for appeal on July 12, 2016 for reasons of sentencing unfair on July 12, 2016, and recognized the fact that the first trial date of the first trial of the first instance has made an unfair assertion of sentencing.

However, if a legitimate reason for appeal is not submitted within the submission period, there is reason for appeal as alleged in the statement in the appellate court even if the reason for appeal is stated in the appellate court.

As such, the defendant and his defense counsel cannot be seen as the grounds for appeal for the statement made at the above trial date, and the grounds for ex officio examination on records can not be found otherwise.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal shall be dismissed by a ruling in accordance with the main sentence of Article 361-4 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, as long as the prosecutor's appeal is ruled, the defendant's appeal shall be dismissed by a judgment.

2. Determination on the prosecutor’s appeal

A. The summary of the grounds of appeal 1) The Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles (in the case of fraud) is recognized that there was no intent to repay the money from the injured party at the time of borrowing the money from the injured party, and the Defendant

Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the defendant of fraud among the facts charged against the defendant. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (three years of suspended sentence in one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unhutiled and unfair.

B. 1) The lower court’s determination on the assertion of misunderstanding the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine on the grounds stated in its reasoning is the facts charged in this part that the Defendant, on the sole basis of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, deceiving the victim, thereby deceiving the victim, thereby deceiving the victim.