All appeals filed by A, C, D, E and prosecutor are dismissed.

Defendant

A, C, D, and E appealed on each part of the lower court’s conviction. However, the prosecutor appealed on April 19, 2010 against Defendant A’s victim P, among the part of the lower court’s judgment that the lower court acquitted the Defendant, only the part of Defendant A’s fraud with respect to the victim I, J, K, L, M, and N, and the part against Defendant B. Each of the fraud against Defendant A’s victim F, G, and H, and the part against the victim’sO, each of the fraud against the victim’s victim F, G, and H, the fraud of KRW 65 million against the victim’sO, and around October 8, 2012 against the victim P, the prosecutor did not appeal.

Of the parts judged not guilty by the court below, the part which the prosecutor did not appeal shall be judged in the trial, but shall be separated from the object of attack and defense between the parties, and thus, this part shall be decided not by the conclusion of the court below, and shall not be judged again in the trial.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal is examined only to the extent that the defense counsel’s opinion, etc. submitted after the deadline for submitting the grounds for appeal is supplemented.

(A) Therefore, the legal counsel's argument that is not entered in the statement of reasons for appeal shall not be judged separately.

Defendant

A1) In light of the following circumstances, there is no evidence to acknowledge each of the following facts, such as misconception of facts. However, the court below found the defendant guilty based on the statement, etc. of the victims without credibility. The court below erred by misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles. A) part of the defendant or Q Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as " Qu") is valid as to the RR rental apartment (hereinafter referred to as "V") in Yangju-si (hereinafter referred to as "the apartment of this case").