All the judgment below against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for five years, for three years, for Defendant B.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (1) In regard to each of the crimes committed by Defendant B (1) of the lower judgment of misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant merely participated in the crime such as defraudation, etc., by deceiving the victims by phone, as an incentive book stating a false content, and did not have the position of intermediate management. The lower court erred by misunderstanding of facts, thereby recognizing that the Defendant participated in the crime, such as defraudation, etc., as an intermediate management book.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence of the lower court against the Defendants A, C, and D (unfair sentencing) (the 7 years of imprisonment, the 1 year and 10 months of imprisonment, and the 3 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant, as a woman-friendly group of co-defendant A, who is a manager-general, participated in most of the crimes of this case from the beginning to the beginning, the defendant's initial accomplice was in contact with A, and the defendant was in the airport, and the defendant was inducing the initial accomplice to finally transfer by telephone conversations with his identity, and the related accomplices were the upper part of his simple inducements. In full view of the following circumstances, the defendant's participation in the crime of this case as an interim management measure, such as the facts charged, is sufficiently recognized.

The above argument by the defendant cannot be accepted.

B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, the crime of this case is a so-called “wishing,” which is organized, planned, and intelligent, and whose nature of the crime is inferior, and Defendant A led multiple crimes over a considerable period of time as a general responsibility for management, and the damage caused by the crime in which the above Defendant was involved is about KRW 190 million, and Defendant B also is an interim management liability and inducement.