All appeals filed by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (unfair sentencing)’s punishment sentenced by the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and unfair (the Defendant A explicitly withdraws his assertion of mistake as to the facts on the first trial date of the first trial of the first instance court). (b) Although Defendant B conspired with the Defendant A to commit an act of deceiving the victims, the lower court found Defendant B guilty of this part of the facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

C (unfair sentencing) The sentence (limited to 8 months of imprisonment) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

(d)

1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the prosecutor found the defendant B not guilty of this part of the facts charged, even though the defendant B by deceiving the victim I and by deceiving the victim I, it is erroneous in the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant B of this part of the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Each sentence sentenced by the lower court against the Defendants is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts, Defendant B also asserted the same purport as that of mistake of facts in the above grounds for appeal.

In full view of the circumstances stated in its holding, the court below rejected Defendant B’s above assertion on the ground that Defendant B conspired with Defendant A to deception the victims as stated in paragraph (1) of the crime committed in the judgment below and acquired financial benefits.

The judgment of the court below is closely compared with the evidence, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., the victims’ purchase of each of the instant land as real estate brokers around March 2004.