Defendant

B All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (1) In fact, Defendant B (a misunderstanding of the legal doctrine) and Defendant B (a misunderstanding of the legal doctrine) merely received money from the victim who believed the horses of Defendant A and received money from the victim, and the lower court convicted Defendant B of the facts charged against Defendant B even though there was no deception by the victim in collusion with Defendant A and did not intend to commit the crime of deception. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine

2) The lower court’s sentencing on Defendant B is too unreasonable.

B. A prosecutor 1) Although the defendants could fully recognize the fact that the defendants misunderstanding the fact that they acquired 150 million won from the damaged person under the pretext of cancelling the provisional registration, the court below acquitted the defendants on this part of the facts charged, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2) The lower court’s sentencing against the illegal Defendants is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s determination as to Defendant B’s assertion, such as the mistake of facts, etc., based on the adopted evidence, is as follows: (i) Defendant B was appointed as the representative director of the company with the knowledge that the financial situation of H is not good, and (ii) Defendant B was aware that the building J was seized due to the failure to pay taxes of the said company after verifying the certified copy of the real estate registry at the time; (iii) Defendant B acquired the said company; and (iv) Defendant B did not use its funds at all while taking over the said company; and (v) the victim raised funds to invest in the business of facts stated in the judgment below

After the fact that there is a need to borrow money from another person and remitted the money of KRW 150 million, this is due to the fact that the J building loan was premised on the fact that the funds will be raised as a result of the fact that the loans were sexual intercourse between the two parties. ⑤ When the Defendants and the injured party met, Defendant A was able to receive a loan as collateral for real estate, such as the J building, and Defendant B was also able to raise funds.