Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.

Defendant

B.

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts (Article 1-A of the original judgment)

As to the fraud described in the paragraph, the Defendant is the Victim North Korean Refugees Support Foundation (hereinafter referred to as the “victim Foundation”).

(2) North Korean defectors (hereinafter referred to as “North Korean defectors”) have received full subsidies from them.

(2) The lower court’s judgment convicting the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts. (2) The sentence of the lower judgment against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable, even though the part of the facts charged is not memory, the Defendant did not directly participate in it. Therefore, the lower court’s judgment convicting the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous.

B. Defendant B 1) Operation of female shelters for the misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles on North Korean defectors without protection (hereinafter “business of female shelters”).

(2) The court below found the Defendant guilty of the charge of fraud as stated in paragraph (2) of the decision of the court below in light of the above circumstances, and there were errors in the misapprehension of legal principles and misunderstanding of legal principles, since the Defendant had been promoted by the above Defendant A prior to entering C, and the “application for operation of the BMM Women’s Rest” submitted to the Victim Foundation was also prepared in the name of the above Defendant A. Even though the Defendant knew that the business of the female shelter was false, the Defendant followed the orders of the above Defendant A even though he was aware that the business of the female shelter was false. However, considering the above circumstances, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have conspired with the above Defendant A, and thus, the court below erred

C. Prosecutor 1) In the event that Defendant A falsely requested expenses to the Victim AE and E for relief support to the Victim Foundation at the time of filing an application for the Defendant’s acquittal on the erroneous determination of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (the part of Defendant A’s acquittal on the grounds), and received the payment, in light of the relevant legal principles, etc.