The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and for six months, for each of the defendants B.

(b).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (in relation to fraud), the Defendants did not make a false statement to the victims that they were seeds of emotional Korean plant variety, and have a duty to inform the victims of the fact that the time limit for issuance of a warranty has elapsed.

Although it cannot be seen, the lower court found Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Each sentence (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor and confiscation, Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor for a period of six months and two years and confiscation) sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendants’ authority was made, the Prosecutor’s judgment was examined ex officio, and the Prosecutor’s “61,40,000 won” as “57,40,000 won” as “57,40,000 won” in the last sentence of Article 2 of the facts charged in the instant case, and “the list of crimes (1)” as “the list of crimes” as indicated in the attached Table No. 1 below, and the judgment on the Defendants was modified by this court’s permission, and thus, the judgment below was no longer maintained in this respect.

B. We examine the judgment of the court below on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, even if there are grounds for ex officio reversal as above, since the defendants' misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles still are subject to the judgment of this court within the scope of

The criminal intent of defraudation, which is a subjective constituent element of fraud, shall be determined by taking into account the objective circumstances such as the defendant's financial history, environment, details of the crime and the process of transaction before and after the crime, unless the defendant is led to his confession. Since the crime of fraud is established by willful negligence, it is also established by willful negligence, which is the subjective element of the constituent element of the crime, it refers to the case which allows it by expressing that the possibility of the occurrence of the crime is uncertain, and dolusis.