Defendant

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

Defendant .

A. From the judgment of the court below 1, Defendant A (as to the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2), Defendant A (as to the judgment of the court below), the former victim Red Co., Ltd. (as to the crime of fraud No. 9180 of the case No. 1 of the High Order No. 2016) concluded an advertising agency contract with the former Red Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) to publicize the business of the Plaintiff Co., Ltd. and paid the advertising price in installments, but it is merely that the Defendant failed to pay the advertising price due to insufficient operating revenues of the company. Accordingly, the Defendant did not deceiving the victim Co., Ltd. at the time of concluding the advertising agency contract, and did not have any intent to commit the crime of defraudation by the Defendant.

2) Of the judgment of the first instance court, the Defendant was merely aware of each fraud against the victim H and four other (2017 order 1290 order order), and actually received investment money from the victim H, I, J, K, and L (hereinafter “victim H, etc.”) and actually used it for the Internet casino business of the Philippines, and there was no intention to obtain the investment money from the Defendant.

3) Of the judgment below of the second instance, each fraud against the victim T and U (hereinafter “victim”) was committed against the victim T and U (hereinafter “Defendant”) and the misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the 2017 senior group 7188 senior group, the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, could have been able to gain profits through the business related to the macroscopic data (bb data) of E Co., Ltd., but it was impossible to obtain profits due to unexpected events, such as the Defendant’s detention, etc., and there was no criminal intent to obtain by fraud the investment money from the Defendant.

4) The sentence sentenced by the first instance court (one hundred months of imprisonment) and the sentence sentenced by the second instance (six months of imprisonment) are too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (the judgment of the court below No. 2) 1) misunderstanding the facts concerning fraud and similar reception, and misunderstanding the legal principles, the Defendant did not work regularly in Co., Ltd. E or participate in the process of attracting the victim.

(ii)..