Defendant

A and C shall be punished by imprisonment for ten months, and by imprisonment for six months, respectively.

A. Defendants A and B did not have conspired to commit the instant fraud or committed deception. Defendants A and B did not have any mistake of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

On a different premise, the court below found the Defendants guilty of the facts charged in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the existence of deception (subject, causal relationship, criminal intent, etc.) and the public-private partnership relationship, or by misunderstanding the legal principles of the public-private partnership.

B) Defendant C and D victim considered that there was a possibility of success in Defendant A’s investment presentation on the business plan of F (hereinafter “F”), and there was only a change after making an investment, and Defendant C did not mislead the victim or engage in an act of fund-raising without delay. Defendant D only prepared teas or meals to assist Defendant C, a de facto husband, a de facto husband. On other premise, the lower court’s judgment convicting Defendants A and B of each of the facts charged of this case on the other premise was erroneous by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) Even if the facts charged of this case are found guilty, the Defendants used all invested money to compensate for the franchise, etc., even if the Defendants were to be guilty, the business plan was followed until the occurrence of unexpected criminal problems; most investors want to work as soon as possible; and even if the investors agreed with the victim and the victim were to participate in the crime, the lower court’s minor punishment (a.g., imprisonment with prison labor: Defendant A, Defendant B, and each of the instant charges of this case;