1. The part of the judgment of the court below regarding Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

except that this shall not apply.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 검사(피고인들에 대하여) 1) 사실오인[피고인 B에 대한 특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)죄의 이유무죄 부분] ① 피고인 B의 주식회사 골프존네트웍스(이하 ‘골프존네트웍스’라 한다

) As to the existence of the exclusive right to supply the victim M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd”) notwithstanding the absence of a binding contract that is practically binding to recognize the exclusive right to supply the product.

(2) In light of the fact that the defendant B was found to have committed fraud, which was found guilty at the court below, and the relation between the fraud crime and the acquittal part of the reasoning (5,00 satisfaction golfization) which was found guilty at the court below, and the fact that the golfization of 5,000 satisfaction with the deception means on the premise of the right to provide the monopoly in a series of frauds is secured, even though the crime of fraud was recognized as to this part of the facts charged against the defendant B, the court below found the defendant B not guilty of the facts charged on the ground that the golfization of 5,00 satisfaction was actually supplied to the victim company, and thus, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence sentenced by the court below against the defendants on unfair sentencing is too unfair.

B. Defendant B: The sentence imposed by the lower court on the above Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principle

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is as stated in Paragraph 3 of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, Defendant B, as stated in the judgment below, “L”) to N who is an employee of the victim company, on or around January 201.

A. Korea Pluri brand Co., Ltd.