The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. After confirming that the European clothing company established a letter of credit against the victim by the victim, the victim of the mistake of facts did not agree to issue a letter of credit under the victim's name against the raw materials company of the clothing ledger. Rather, the victim explained that the victim will engage in a transaction with a risk burden that the issuance of the letter of credit under the victim's name should take precedence over the original materials company

In addition, since there is no substantial difference between the credit transaction and cash transaction, even if the settlement method has been changed from the credit transaction method to the cash transaction method, the defendant is not obligated to notify the victim.

In addition, the defendant did not have the intention of breach of trust.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the defendant by misunderstanding the facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, ① the defendant was entrusted with the business related to the issuance of the letter of credit from the victim and was traded only by the L/C transaction method, and only after verifying the fact that the L/C was issued by the European clothing company, ② the L/C transaction method under the payment guarantee of the bank is in substantial difference from the transaction method that is bound to be exposed to the parties’ default or credit risk, and is more favorable to the safe recovery of the investment amount. ③ The victim invested the defendant in the purchase price of the raw materials of clothing under the above agreement and entrusts the related business, ④ the defendant changed the transaction method or made a transaction contrary to the above agreement.