The part of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding the compensation order and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of unfair sentencing (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for three years, confiscation, and the second instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for one year) by each lower court is too unreasonable.

B. As to each criminal facts of the judgment of the second instance, the Defendant did not have the intent to aid and abetting the use of a computer, on the ground that he thought that he/she had committed an act related to Bitcoin, but did not recognize that his/her act was aiding and abetting the use of a computer.

2. Each court of original judgment, after completing the hearing on the Defendant, sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor as above.

The Defendant appealed against each judgment of the lower court, and this Court decided to hold a joint hearing of the appealed cases.

However, each of the crimes in the judgment of the court below against the defendant is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and a single sentence should be sentenced pursuant to Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

However, there are reasons for the above ex officio reversal in the judgment below.

Even if the above defendant's assertion of mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court, it is examined.

3. On the other hand, the judgment of the court below is justified if the evidence adopted by the court below is examined in light of the records of this case, and the defendant alleged the same purport that he had no intention to commit fraud by using the computer. However, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the charges by compiling the evidence duly adopted and examined. On the other hand, the court below rejected the defendant's above assertion with detailed reasons.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is groundless.

4. If so, the judgment of the court below is based on the above reasons.