Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor of one year and six months, and Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor of one year.

A. Fact misunderstanding 1) As to Defendant B’s fraud related to Defendant B’s special credit of the United States of America against Defendant D, Defendant B only delivered a fluencies related to the trade of the United States special credit through L, and the victim D invested KRW 63 million, and the person who received KRW 63 million is not Defendant B, and Defendant B was not a person who received KRW 63 million, thereby deceiving the victim D and defrauded KRW 63 million.

shall not be deemed to exist.

2) As to Defendant A’s fraud of KRW 2.5 million in the name of the customs clearance cost, such as gold leader, around June 2012, and Defendant A’s fraud of KRW 58 million in the name of the purchase cost of the Defendants, Defendant A did not make any false statement about the use of the victim D with regard to KRW 2.5 million in the name of the purchase cost of gold leader, etc., and Defendant A did not have any false statement about the victim D’s purchase cost of KRW 2.5 million in the name of the purchase cost of gold bullion, etc., and the victim D had an intent and ability to refrain from the use thereof, and the victim D invested KRW 2.5 million in the cost of promoting the purchase project, such as gold leader

shall not be deemed to exist.

The victim D has invested KRW 58 million in its own judgment with respect to the purchase of gold, etc., and the defendants also have been subject to fraud to local people of the Philippines, and the defendants do not have acquired 58 million won by fraud to the victim D.

3) As to the fraud against the victim P, Defendant A used the remainder of the purchase of apartment by remitting KRW 100 million borrowed from the victim P to N with the absence of the obligation of KRW 100 million to M, and used it as the remainder of the purchase of apartment, and Defendant A had the intent and ability to repay the borrowed money at the time. As such, Defendant A acquired KRW 100 million by deceiving the

Defendant B, upon Defendant A’s request, only consented to use his name in the loan certificate for the victim P, thereby taking part in the crime of defraudation.

shall not be deemed to exist.

4) Nevertheless, the lower court found all of the charges guilty, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. Sentencing;