1. The part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

2. Defendant B-.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentence (6 months of imprisonment) against Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B 1) Fact-misunderstanding (the attempted part of fraud) of the above Defendant: (a) although there was a fact that the above Defendant cited 7 of the certificate of deposit forged to J and gambling domestic claims in Korea; (b) it was merely in accordance with H’s instructions; (c) there was no conspiracy between H and H to acquire KRW 200 million from the J; or (d) deceiving the J.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged.

2) The lower court’s sentence (6 months of imprisonment) against the above Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the judgment ex officio (Defendant A) prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by Defendant A, the above Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act at the Seoul Northern District Court on February 8, 2018, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on the 20th of the same month.

Defendant

Since the crime of the judgment of the court below against A and the crime of the above violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, which became final and conclusive, are the concurrent crimes of the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment for the crime of the judgment of the court below should be sentenced in consideration of equity with the case of the judgment at the same time according to Article 39 (1)

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

B. Determination 1 on the grounds of appeal by Defendant B was clearly erroneous in the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance trial, in view of the intent of the substantial direct deliberation principle adopted by the Criminal Procedure Act as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts

A witness of the first instance trial is a witness of the first instance trial in full view of the results of the first examination of evidence and the results of an additional examination of evidence until the closing of the appellate trial.