A. As to the first instance judgment of the court below, Defendant A was aware of the facts (Defendant A) No. 1, and Defendant A introduced Defendant B the victim N to Defendant B by deceiving Defendant B, and there was no conspiracy by Defendant A to commit the crime of defraudation against Defendant B, C and the above victim in the order, and there was no deception by Defendant A or Defendant A made personal profits.

B) As to No. 2017 High 283 as indicated in the judgment of the second instance, Defendant A merely delivered the content from them to the victim Z by deceiving AP and AM, but did not have the intention of deception.

In particular, 100 million won out of the 600 million won of the money received from the victim Z is not the fraud that Defendant A borrowed and repaid.

C) As to No. 2017 High 359 as indicated in the judgment of the second instance, Defendant A only received KRW 20 million from the victim T, and there was no intention to obtain it by fraud.

Nevertheless, the lower court convicted Defendant A of this part of the facts charged that Defendant A acquired 90 million won from the above victim.

2) Defendant B made a false statement to the victim N as a custodian of a warehouse for the storage of the former president’s non-funds (the “former president”). However, this was the intent of Defendant C through Defendant C to seek a new right factoring desired by the said victim and receive a fee from Defendant A, which was not the purpose of washing the check as determined by the lower court.

3) Defendant C did not have conspired with Defendant A or B to commit the crime of defraudation of the victim N, and there was no deception or personal benefit.

4) Defendant D received one copy of the KRW 500 million check from the victim C upon the request of the victim C to exchange in cash, and requested the co-defendant E to exchange in cash. Defendant D co-defendant E of the lower court to exchange in cash. Defendant E of the lower court is only KRW 450 million.