The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

, however, from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s sentence (6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s punishment (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The contents and result of the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., in light of the Defendants’ liability is not less severe, but on the other hand, the Defendants appeared to have committed a mistake and reflect against themselves. The full amount of KRW 45 million obtained by deceit for the victims after the decision of the lower court was made, and the Defendants were the primary offenders, and the Defendants were the primary offenders, and all of the sentencing conditions in the instant case’s argument were taken into account, it is unfair that the lower court’s punishment imposed on the Defendants is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the defendants' appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence acknowledged by this court is as follows: (a) the summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except for adding “1. Defendants’ oral statement” to the summary of evidence, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. The Defendants: Articles 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the relevant criminal facts and the choice of punishment;

1. The defendants of suspended sentence: The defendants of this case shall set the same sentence as the order within the mitigated area of general fraud, on the grounds that the reasons for sentencing under Article 62 (1) (the favorable circumstances as seen earlier) of the Criminal Act were examined as to the above argument of unfair sentencing. For the same reason, the Supreme Court's sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee shall be limited to the range of recommended sentences (a year of imprisonment; hereinafter the same shall apply).