The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and four months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the Prosecutor 1) alleged the misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine (not guilty part in the judgment of the court below), the facts charged are found guilty, and the judgment of the appellate court that held that “The public recruitment relationship between all union members and the Dol-ro Team belonging to the Telecommunications Finance Fraud Group organized by C is recognized and not constituted a public recruitment relationship by team unit” (Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2015No 1649) was affirmed by dismissal of this appeal.

Nevertheless, the court below did not recognize the defendant's joint principal offender's liability on the ground that the crime as stated in this part of the facts charged was committed in the Sami Team, other than the Jami Team to which the defendant belongs.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of judgment.

2) In light of the fact that there is a need to strictly punish a person who committed an illegal telephone financial fraud, and the Defendant directly carried out a key role in deceptioning by telephone to the victims, and that the period of participation in the commission of the crime is also a prolonged period, the punishment imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment) is too uneasible and unfair.

B. Defendant 1) The Defendant alleged a mistake of fact did not commit the crime No. 4 in the crime list No. 4.

A person who misrepresents the BA examination as described in No. 4 of the Crime List No. 4 shall have worked at the GA team in which he/she received a decoration.

BB, and there is no fact that the Defendant was false in the future team, and the Defendant was false in the BA test.

2) In light of the following: (a) there are circumstances under which the Defendant was living conditions and was involved in the instant crime; (b) the Defendant was involved in the instant crime and distributed the proceeds therefrom; (c) there is no history of criminal punishment; and (d) the Defendant was able to live faithfully without recommitting the Defendant’s mistake in depth.