2. The judgment of the court below is that the amount of damage in this case is not significant; Defendant A denied the liability for the crime of fraud; Defendant A had been punished twice due to fraud (the first sentence, the first sentence, the suspension of the execution of imprisonment). However, Defendant B is against the wrongness in the confession of each of the crimes in this case at the time of the trial; Defendant B was a first offender with no criminal history; Defendant B agreed with the victim G, and the victim B agreed to the establishment and cancellation of the establishment of a right to collateral security on the O land; Defendant A deposited KRW 105 million for the victim G; Defendant A deposited the crime in this case for the victim at the court below; Defendant A was in a concurrent relationship between fraud established on May 4, 2012 and the second sentence after Article 37 of the Criminal Act; Defendant A had to be judged at the same time in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment was rendered at the same time; Defendant B’s motive and condition of the crime in this case; Defendant B’s health; Defendant B’s motive and condition after the crime in this case’s imprisonment.

3. In conclusion, the Prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendants is without merit. Thus, all of the appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.