The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. G, who is an employee of the Defendant, was in charge of the planning and production of drones written in the facts charged of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles. G, if the Defendant was to have KRW 30 million through KRW 40 million, would be entitled to receive a subsidy of KRW 150 million from the F group. The Defendant borrowed and arranged the initial cost from the Defendant, but did not enter the F group, and did not have to pay personnel expenses for the human resources invested in the production as a result, since advertising profits did not occur.

Therefore, the defendant was only included in G in relation to the financing of production costs, and there is no fact that the victim was accused.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment with labor for four months and one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. On January 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim C of the instant facts charged that “In the event that he/she contributes to the fourth sub-small-sized D E” (E) “E Production in D, he/she will make a contribution of KRW 20 million per round as a contribution fee.”

However, in fact, since the Defendant had no particular property, and had had a debt equivalent to KRW 500 million in the past, there was no funds to make the drama production, and there was a clear state of whether the subsidies were raised from FF forces. Therefore, even if the victim contributed to the said drama, there was no intent or ability to pay the contribution fee.

The Defendant, as such, induced the victim, and caused the victim to take photographs on the four occasions from February 20, 2017 to April 1, 2017, acquired the pecuniary benefit equivalent to the amount of the contribution in a manner that does not pay the consideration, even though the Defendant had had the victim take the photographs on the said four occasions.

3. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. According to each evidence of the judgment of the court below, the defendant is the representative of H Co., Ltd., and whether to produce the instant drama.