All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The lower court rendered a judgment of conviction against Defendant A, on the charge of fraud (Provided, That the part of the accomplice in Defendant B is not guilty on the ground), on the charge of forging a private document and exercising an investigation document, acquitted judgment against Defendant B on the charge of fraud, acquitted judgment against Defendant B on the charge of fraud, and acquitted judgment against Defendant B on the charge of forging a private document and uttering of an investigation document, and filed an appeal against the Defendants among the lower judgment.

Therefore, since the judgment of the court below became final and conclusive as is on the charge of forging a private document and exercising a falsified document against the Defendants who did not appeal by the prosecutor, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the fraud against the Defendants.

2. According to the witness A’s legal statement of the gist of the grounds for appeal, although Defendant B could sufficiently recognize the fact that he committed the instant fraud in collusion with Defendant A, the lower court rendered a not guilty verdict of this part of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

3. The court below held that there was a witness A’s statement in the court below which corresponds to the facts charged in this part that Defendant B participated in Defendant A’s fraud, but the defendant B did not consistently visit the port of the injured party from the investigation stage to the court below’s trial. The loan documents, such as the credit guarantee agreement of this case, were not discovered, and the phrases related to Defendant B were not discovered. Although the defendant A and the defendant B were friendly children, they are already disputed about the return of their seal imprints before the occurrence of this case, and they were subject to criminal punishment due to each other. In light of the above, it is difficult to recognize the part of the defendant B’s participation in the crime.