The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (i.e., the Defendant succeeded to the status of purchaser of the said letter of interest from the limited partnership company (hereinafter “R”) that purchased the said letter of interest from G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), the owner of the instant letter of interest, thereby making it impossible for G to take over the said letter of interest from G, and the acquisition fund was also able to be raised.

She also received investments only from the victim E, and the rest of the victims did not receive direct investments (i.e., the rest victims invested in E and invested again in the defendant), and did not accept the above letter, but all of the investments made from the victim E were returned.

Then, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The following circumstances revealed through the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, namely, the defendant alleged that he/she had intended to acquire the instant friendship with investment funds, but the defendant has promoted his/her business unreasonably without raising the acquisition fund by using the investment funds for the payment of earnings to the existing investors (see, e.g., the defendant's prosecutor's statement, etc. in the investigation record), and the victim K, L, and I stated in the court of the court below that he/she acquired the instant friendship with the investment funds, such as direct or through E, and made a statement to the effect that he/she invested in the defendant, i.e., he/she would receive the instant friendship with the investment funds, as stated in the facts charged, and that he/she would have contributed to the principal as well as high profits with the operating proceeds.