The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal argues that the court below's judgment which acquitted the defendant on the grounds that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the defendant had by deceiving the victim and deceiving 120,000 won, even though the prosecutor acknowledged the fact that the defendant would sell the Helty account, and that there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, and that there is an error of law by misunderstanding the fact that the court below erred

2. The ex officio judgment prosecutor applied for the amendment of a bill of amendment to the indictment with the content that "victim D" is changed to "victim F," among the facts charged in the trial. Since this court permitted this, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, even if the above reasons for ex officio destruction exist, the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope of determining the modified facts charged, and this is examined in

3. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. On the Internet “C” website on December 29, 2013, the revised charge: (a) sold the Victim F to KRW 120,000,000; and (b) obtained the 120,000 won by changing the ID and password he/she sold on February 1, 2014.

B. The lower court rendered a judgment that acquitted the Defendant on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

C. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below and the court below, all of the circumstances stated by the court below are recognized.

In addition, in full view of the fact that the Defendant had a character of the offcoming 20,00 won from November 201, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is sufficient to have there is no reasonable doubt that the Defendant deceivings the victim and defrauds 120,000 won.