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

Defendant

C A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Defendant

B, .

A. Defendant B and C’s punishment (Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 4 months, 2 years of suspended execution, etc., Defendant C: imprisonment with prison labor for 3 years and 6 months) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant D1) misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement for the purpose of actual residence, and was duly granted a loan from the victim Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd., and did not commit fraud by deceiving the above victim as stated in the facts charged, in collusion with Defendant B and C.

2) The sentence of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, etc.) that was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The defendant alleged that the judgment of the court below on the defendant D's assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles is identical to the above, and the court below rejected the above assertion by giving a detailed statement of the judgment on the "a summary of evidence" column. In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is justified and it is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as alleged by the above defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

B. Considering the fact that the crime of this case in collusion with B, etc. or by deceiving several victims on several occasions, the crime of this case in which Defendant C’s unfair judgment on the determination of sentencing is not good, the crime of this case should be punished strictly by the Defendant.

However, on the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case, there is no past record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine prior to it, the victims do not want the punishment of the defendant by mutual consent with AF and AO among the victims, and the victim teaching life-stock company in the first instance.