Defendant 1, 3.

A. Defendant 1 was aware of the fact that each fraud against the victim Q was committed (the lower court’s judgment 2014 high group 294) (the victim Q Q was aware that the Defendant would invest in the stock or futures option with the funds received from the said victim, and that the principal loss may be incurred therefrom.

The defendant is not guilty of deceiving the above victim.

Although the defendant did not have the intent to commit fraud because he did not pay the principal of the investment due to the continuous occurrence of the loss, even though he did not have the intent to commit the crime of deception, since he did not have the intent to commit the crime of deception.

B) Each fraud against the victim AD and AG (the second half of the judgment of the court below 2017 order 651) was committed by the Defendant, who received investments from the victim AD and AG, and did not have agreed to guarantee the principal amount or the due date for repayment, and the victims also knew that the Defendant was able to invest in futures option with a large risk of principal loss, and thus, the Defendant deceiving the victims.

shall not be deemed to exist.

2) Improper sentencing (as to the judgment of the court below Nos. 1, 2, and 3)

B. The Prosecutor’s Sentencing (the judgment of the first instance court is with respect to the judgment)

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the judgment of the court below on the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 3.

As to the judgment of the court below in the first and third instances, the defendant filed each appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance, and this court decided to hold the above two appeals together for a new trial.

Each crime of the first and third judgment against the defendant is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one sentence shall be imposed in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

However, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts against the judgment of the court below 1 and 3 is still subject to the judgment of the court of this court, and this is examined below.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the victim A Q.