The judgment of conviction against Defendant A in the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant

A. Imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B explicitly withdrawn the assertion of mistake of facts on the first trial date.

Meanwhile, Defendant A asserted that Defendant A did not have the intent to commit fraud (the first crime in the judgment of the case of 2019Da590) against Victim C in the first half of April 6, 2020 from the second half of 2020 to the first half of 2016. However, this cannot be a legitimate reason for appeal as it was filed after the deadline for submitting the grounds of appeal. Moreover, even if ex officio review, Defendant A’s fact-finding and judgment that found Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged are justifiable. Thus, the above argument by Defendant A is without merit.

Each sentence of the lower court against the Defendants (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for one and half years and for two months of the lower judgment; and Defendant B: Imprisonment with prison labor for six months of the lower judgment) is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment of the second judgment against Defendant A by the prosecutor (unfair form of punishment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Before determining the Defendants’ ex officio determination of the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s grounds for appeal against Defendant A, the judgment of the court below was rendered to Defendant A, and the judgment of the court below was pronounced to Defendant A, and the Defendant appealed against the conviction except the compensation order portion among the judgment of the court of first instance on the grounds of unfair sentencing, and the above Defendant and the Prosecutor appealed against the judgment of the court of second instance on the grounds of unfair sentencing, and the party members

However, since each crime recognized by the court below against the above defendant is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the conviction part against the defendant A and the second judgment of the court of first instance should be reversed.

3. The above defendant Eul's assertion of unfair sentencing against the defendant Eul is fraudulent with regard to C by deceiving the victim C along with the defendant Eul, thereby deceiving the victim's sum of KRW 964,00 from the victim.