A. Each sentence of the lower judgment by Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant H 1 did not act as a member of the criminal organization of Bosing crimes, nor did the Defendant act as a member of the organization of Bosing crimes.

2) The punishment of the original decision-making decision-making in the second instance is too unreasonable.

(c)

Each sentence of the judgment of the court below against the Defendants by the public prosecutor is too unhued and unfair.

2. Of the judgment of the court below, the part related to Defendant A, which was partially ex officio, was examined by this court by combining the appeal cases against the judgment of the court below. Accordingly, among the entire judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance, each of the crimes committed by the organization of the crime against Defendant A, crimes committed against the organization of crime, crimes committed, crimes committed against the organization of crime, crimes committed against the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment, and crimes committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against the crime committed against

However, among the judgment of the second instance court that did not have the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the part concerning fraud from No. 487 to No. 493 of the crime committed against Defendant A and the part concerning Defendant H are still subject to determination, and the appeal by the Defendants and the prosecutor is still subject to examination. Accordingly, I examine this part of the judgment of the second instance.

3. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to Defendant H’s assertion of mistake, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake is acceptable as to the fact that the Defendant joined the instant Bosing Criminal Organization and took part in the activities as a measure to withdraw the Defendant and took part in the role as a measure to withdraw the Defendant.

A. The Defendant is a licensing organization.