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

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

Defendant .

A. Defendant A and Defendant C1 do not have any misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles. Defendant C merely went to the scene in cooperation with the police to help arrest the person who defrauds the answer in the marriage hall, and did not have the network by such means as investigating the surroundings in the vicinity of the memorial fund receipt unit. Therefore, the lower court’s finding the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles, or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) Each sentence of unfair sentencing (a fine of KRW 3 million) of the lower court (a fine of KRW 3 million) is unreasonable.

B. Each sentence of the lower court rendered by the prosecutor (a fine of three million won) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination on Defendant A

A. Before determining on the grounds for appeal by Defendant A, Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. at the Changwon District Court on February 13, 2019, and the fact that the judgment on April 26, 2019 became final and conclusive is significant in this court.

However, since the crime of the judgment of the court below and the crime of fraud against Defendant A for which the judgment of the court below became final and conclusive are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the case of concurrent crimes and equality shall be considered pursuant to the main sentence of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and the punishment for the crime of the court below shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt the punishment, and therefore, the part against

B. However, despite the existence of the grounds for ex officio reversal, the argument of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by Defendant A is still subject to the judgment of this court, which will first be examined below.

3. Judgment on the misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by Defendant A and Defendant C

A. We examine the case, and the defendants asserted the same purport as the reasons for appeal in the court below, and the court below held the judgment as "the defendants and the defense counsel".