All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error, misunderstanding of legal principles and unreasonable sentencing)

A. In finding this part of the facts constituting a crime, the lower court stated only that “the Defendants conspired and conspired on May 2016,” without specifying the Defendants’ act or date and time of the crime,” which infringes on the Defendants’ right to defense. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the grounds that it did not specifically specify the facts constituting a crime.

B) Defendant A received KRW 200,000,000 from the victim C, and Defendant B merely borrowed part of the above money from the victim. As such, the judgment of the court below which found Defendant B guilty of this part of the facts charged was erroneous in misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles without deceiving the victim C as stated in the facts charged. 2) Defendant B’s fraud, occupational embezzlement (2019No. 6132) and delivery KRW 50,000 to Defendant B is merely based on the victim’s own business judgment. Thus, Defendant B, as described in the facts charged, did not deceiving the victim, and instead, Defendant B did not receive KRW 50,00,000 from the above victim. Thus, the court below found Defendant B guilty of this part of the facts charged because it was erroneous in misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, and Defendant B’s reasoning used by Defendant B as an occupational embezzlement to obtain KRW 200,000,000 from Defendant F, which did not have been used from Defendant B’s own funds.