Since the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and the fraud of the defendant B against the victim'sO of the defendants who did not appeal by the prosecutor is separated and confirmed, it shall be excluded from

In light of the fact that Defendant A prepared a human resources supply plan to the victim C based on the human resources supply plan received from Defendant B, and Defendant B prepared a “written ratification of the right to operate the restaurant” for the victim, etc., Defendant B knew that Defendant A had been aware that he/she would enter into a meal service consignment operation contract for the restaurant attached to the dormitory (hereinafter “instant contract”) by deceiving the victim and obtain the money from the victim.

In addition, the main reason why the victim entered into the contract of this case with the defendant Eul is based on the premise that the defendant Eul could supply enormous human resources for a long time, but it did not have such human resources supply ability to the defendant Eul, the defendant A used most of the money received from the victim in a place unrelated to the business of this case, and the defendant B did not properly conduct the dormitory business by attracting human resources in the building of this case until now, it is recognized that the defendants conspired with the defendants and acquired the price of 764,450,000 won from the victim in relation to the contract of this case.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on this issue is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

Judgment

The criminal appeal court of the relevant law also belongs to the appellate court.