A. misunderstanding of facts 1) In relation to the establishment of a principal offense of fraud of D, ① the winning number offered by the site of this case is merely predicted, and all the members are aware of this fact, and D cannot be deemed to have deceiving. Since D provided predicted numbers to its members according to the program developed on the basis of know-how for a long time, it cannot be deemed that there was an intentional fraud. ② Although the predicted number actually offered was winning, it cannot be deemed that the act was a deception because it was made and posted a receipt only when the member did not purchase it or the member did not want to post a receipt, and there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the fact that it was sent the winning number as if the non-connection did not want to do so. 2) Defendant A did not know of the winning number calculated, Defendant A entered the winning number after the announcement, and Defendant C did not know of the winning number, and Defendant C did not have known of the fact that it was false after the announcement of the winning number, and Defendant C did not have any role in the investigation of this case.

B stated, “A defendant C, who was in the same V dialogue group, was aware of the forgery.” However, this is merely a statement based on the abstract side, and the winnings after forgery.