beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part against Defendant A, B, and C shall be reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment for eight years, and Defendant B.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A, B, C, E, H, and J1), Defendant C, E, H, H, and J’s assertion of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (the violation of the Act on the Regulation of Unauthorized Receipt of Goods related to XM Transactions, and Door-to-Door Sales, etc.). However, the Defendants’ responsibility should be limited to the actual amount of investment attraction, and it is unlawful to find the Defendants guilty of the total amount of investment exceeding this limit. Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendants guilty of all the investments indicated in each of the facts charged against Defendant A, B, C, E, H, H, and J on the grounds that there is an error of law by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.
(1) Defendant A: 8 years of imprisonment with prison labor; 2. Defendant C: Imprisonment with prison labor for 5 years and 6 months; 4 years of a stay of execution for 2 years and 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant A.
B. The prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts (the organization of a criminal organization, joining a criminal organization, joining a criminal organization) constitutes a criminal organization established for the purpose of a crime and equipped with the command and command system, but all of the activities of an organization of a crime, joining a criminal organization, and committing a crime organization are not guilty of mistake of facts. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants of unjust sentencing (the defendant A and B) is erroneous of law.
2. Ex officio determination
A. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below on Defendant B’s fraud, violation of the Door-to-Door Sales, etc. Act, and violation of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission, Defendant A and B provided explanation to Defendant B about the FXM business, and recommended Defendant B to make an investment on July 12, 2016.