The guilty part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Defendant .

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts does not have instructed or conspired to commit each of theless crimes in relation to K's number of shares and M's number of shares. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (De facto M) did not have been involved in each of the crimes with respect to the K-party shares and the M-party shares shares.

C. A prosecutor 1) Examining the erroneous determination of facts (the part not guilty against Defendant A) in the investigation agency of the court of the court below, and the background leading up to C’s reversal of the statement made by the investigation agency in the court of the court below, it is difficult to believe that C’s statement in the court of the court below in relation to this part is the same. According to the remaining evidence, although Defendant A could have recognized the fact that Defendant A took part in the crime without relation to E’s number of shares, the court below found Defendant A not guilty of this part of the facts charged otherwise, there is an error of law by misunderstanding of facts against the law. (2) The court below’s judgment that found the Defendants not guilty of this part of the facts charged is unjust.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of ex officio determination (Defendant A), Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment on May 9, 2019 by the Seoul Central District Court for fraud, etc. on three and nine years, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on July 25, 2019.

However, since the crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive and each of the crimes of this case are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, in accordance with the first sentence of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, a sentence for each of the crimes of this case shall be imposed in consideration of equity in the case where judgment is rendered at the same time, and therefore, the part of

On the other hand, the defendant A and B's assertion of misunderstanding of facts, mistake of facts and the prosecutor's assertion of unreasonable sentencing (excluding the defendant A's portion) are still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined by changing the claim.

B. Defendant A.