The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

With respect to the argument of mistake of facts, the defendant introduced H to I on the basis of personal-friendly relationship with I, and I loaned money for the purpose of high interest with sufficient collateral and high interest, and the defendant did not allow the loan transaction between I and H to take place.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below convicting this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the facts.

On April 21, 2014, the Defendant asserted a mistake of facts that the Defendant is not guilty in that there is no possibility of causing damage, such as there is sufficient security for occupational breach of trust, in the supplementary statement of reasons for appeal.

However, if the appeal is lawful with respect to the grounds for ex officio examination, the appellate court shall judge without any need to examine whether the grounds for appeal are submitted or whether the grounds for appeal are included in the statement of grounds for appeal. However, with respect to matters other than the grounds for ex officio examination, only such matters are included in the grounds for appeal submitted within the prescribed period, unless they are stated in the petition of appeal or not. Meanwhile, the appellate court shall state matters not included in the grounds for appeal

Even if there are grounds for appeal, such as the assertion contained in the statement, cannot be deemed to exist.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Do1234, Sept. 22, 1998; Supreme Court Decision 207Do4310, Jul. 24, 2008). Therefore, the defense counsel’s grounds for appeal filed after the deadline for submitting the statement of grounds of grounds of appeal, as mentioned above, asserted that there was a mistake of facts as to the occupational breach of trust and stated it in

Even if there is no such ground for appeal, it shall not be considered that there is such ground for appeal, so it shall not be judged on the above argument of mistake.

The lower court’s sentence (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) on the ground of unfair sentencing is unlimited.