All appeals filed by A, B and prosecutor are dismissed.

A. According to the reasoning of the appeal by Defendant A, Defendant B, and the defense counsel and the statement at the first trial date, Defendant A, Defendant B, and the first trial date, the court below held as follows.

Although the amount of damage stated in the port is KRW 90 million, it seems that the injured party borrowed KRW 60 million from Defendant A with gambling money, and the injured party did not repay the above money to Defendant A, the injured party appears to have made a false statement on the ground that the amount of damage should be deemed KRW 30 million, and the sentencing should be considered at the second trial date of the trial of the first instance. The injured party stated to the effect that the sentencing should be taken into consideration on the date of the second trial of the first instance. The damage amount is not different depending on whether the amount of damage was 30 million or not, and the legal provisions of the law are not different. In addition, it is evident that the injured party abused KRW 90 million from the injured party through gambling, and the injured party's failure to repay it is merely a situation after the crime, and it is merely a fact-finding that Defendant B and the defense counsel asserted that the injured party is erroneous.

The argument is without merit.

Each sentence sentenced to the sentence (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for a year, etc.) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor's decision that the court below sentenced the defendants (defendant A: one year and six months of imprisonment; one year and six months of imprisonment; three years of probation; one year and six months of imprisonment; three years of probation; one year and two years of probation; one year and two years of probation; one year and three years of probation; six months of imprisonment and one year of probation; one year of probation; one year of probation; ten months of imprisonment and one year of probation; two years of probation, etc.) are too uneasible.

2. Defendant A and B’s appeal and the prosecutor’s appeal against the said Defendants are examined as well as the grounds for appeal by Defendant A, B and the prosecutor.

The fact that the crime of this case is heavy, the amount of fraud is large, and the defendants are led to or corresponding to the crime of this case, such as the crime of this case by deceiving the victim with the money that is punished for fraud systematically after eating phiphones.