Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than four months.

Defendant

A.

A. Defendant A1) The Defendant believed the horses of H and delivered the account in the name of M to the victim so that he remitted the amount of KRW 10 million to the said account, and did not deceiving the victim as stated in the instant facts charged, thereby deceiving the victim to acquire KRW 10 million from the said account.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which judged otherwise and found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in fact.

2) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 3 million) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (unfair sentencing)’s imprisonment (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(c)

The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A (unfair sentencing) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal as to Defendant B, according to the records, the defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of the imprisonment for eight months at the Busan District Court on June 21, 2018 and the decision became final and conclusive on October 23, 2018.

Since the crime of fraud for which judgment has become final and conclusive and the crime of this case is in a concurrent crime relationship with the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a sentence shall be imposed in consideration of equity and equity in cases where judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below against

3. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that Defendant A deceiving the victim as stated in the instant facts charged, thereby deceiving the victim and defrauding the victim KRW 10 million, can be fully recognized.

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion of mistake is rejected.

(1) The injured party shall, if he/she invests KRW 40 million in the business of constructing officetels at the port of entry by Defendant A, pay the principal to the investigative agency separately by paying the amount of KRW 10 million each month between five months.

Defendant A’s total account known to Defendant A 40 million.