All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) At the time of receiving KRW 200 million from Defendant A’s victim, there was a possibility of success in the Defendant A’s business, and the Defendant A planned to repay the said money to the victim within the time limit agreed through the said business. Therefore, at the time of receiving the said money, the Defendant A had the intent and ability to repay and had no criminal intent to commit fraud. (2) Defendant B believed the possibility of success in the said business to the extent that the said money was invested in the Defendant’s business, and Defendant B did not have participated in or conspired to receive KRW 200 million from the victim.

Therefore, there is no intention to commit deception or fraud against the victim of the defendant B, so the defendant B should not be applied to the accomplice of the crime of fraud with the defendant A.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a year and six months of imprisonment, a suspended sentence of two years, and a community service work 120 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. Defendant A requested that Defendant B, who was aware of the fact that he had been at the end of August 2014 or around the beginning of September 2014, “A is in the process of development projects and real estate PF projects, and is required to pay the debt, making an investment or lending of funds.” After three months, Defendant B demanded that the principal be repaid along with interest 25%. Accordingly, Defendant B demanded that the principal be repaid at 25% after the date of the three months. On September 20, 2014, which was related to the victim D from the bank branch in Seoul (hereinafter referred to as Seoul) around the following point: (a) even if the progress of the C development projects or real estate PF projects was impossible to generate profits within a short period, without notifying the victim that he/she had a relationship with the victim D for several years; and (b) Defendant B demanded that the principal be repaid together with interest 25% after three months.”