A. Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles 1) Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (misunderstanding of facts as to fraud or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the crime committed on June 19, 2018 as shown in the attached Table 9, 10.

6. The part concerning the crime of KRW 20 million in total is only a single crime of KRW 20 million, and the defendant did not participate in it.

A defendant and B (hereinafter referred to as "victim") who returned on August 10, 2018 to the victim G (hereinafter referred to as "victim") shall be excluded from the amount of profit.

2) Since the misapprehension of legal principles as to fraud does not specify the specific amount of pecuniary gain, fraud, which is a property crime, cannot be established unless it is specified, the victim E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim E”).

(B) The “unprofitable profit” stated in the facts charged in relation to the facts charged is not specified as property profit. B. Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of fact in collusion with Defendant A did not acquire money from the victim. C. Each punishment against the Defendants of unfair sentencing (Defendant A’s imprisonment with labor for three years, Defendant B’s imprisonment with labor for two years and six months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A’s assertion of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles 1) As to the assertion of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), June 19, 2018

6. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below on the part that the amount of 20 million won should be excluded from the amount of profit, the defendant conspired with B on June 19, 2018; and

6. It may fully recognize the fact that the sum of 20.0 million won is obtained by deceit from the victim.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.

① On October 4, 2018, the Defendant borrowed 500 million won including the above 20 million won from the first police investigation to the original trial.