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

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of four years and six months.

Defendant

B.

Defendant

A (unfair imprisonment) The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B The defendant is working as the FF employee of the defendant A (hereinafter referred to as "A") who was operated by the defendant A in mistake of facts, and the defendant explained the same as it is to the victim and received investment money from the victim and delivered it to A as it is, and there is no fact that the defendant conspired with the victim A in collusion with the victim.

The sentence of imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Defendant

A’s judgment on the grounds of appeal is that the crime of this case is repeated against many victims, and the quality of the crime is not good, and that the defendant has been punished for the same kind of crime several times, and that the defendant has committed a second offense during the period of repeated crime is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, in light of various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence, etc., the Defendant’s punishment against the Defendant is somewhat inappropriate, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is reasonable.

Defendant

The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s determination of mistake of facts as to the grounds for appeal No. B, namely, ① the victim has consistently made a statement from the investigative agency to the lower court to the effect that “The Defendant has given 10% interest each of the instant funds to the Defendant, by explaining in detail the gold-reader business and creating high profits.”