The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts1) The Defendant did not invite to commit each of the instant crimes with the Defendant’s name misscising scisfing staff and the victims. The Defendant did not know at all whether the accomplice and the victims had committed an act of causing the Defendant to commit an accomplice. The records indicate that the Defendant stated to the effect that he was aware of the conspiracy in the process of partial investigation and the trial of the lower court, but this is merely a mistake in communication such as an error of interpretation. 2) The Defendant did not have any intent to commit each of the instant crimes.

In the case of the crime of intrusion and theft against the victim B, the defendant thought that the defendant " entering an apartment managed by the criminal defendant and departing from the apartment with illegal things which he/she could not move directly," but did not recognize that he/she was stolen by intrusion upon a third party's residence.

Even in the case of the crime of fraud against victims E, as at the time of each crime against victims B, only the defendant thought that he/she had the goods that he/she is difficult to move directly.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and four months of imprisonment, and confiscation No. 2 of seized evidence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a case where two or more legal principles on the assertion of mistake of facts do not require a legally fixed sentence in relation to co-offenders who process a crime, but only combines the intent to realize the crime by combining two or more persons to jointly process and realize the crime. Although there was no process of the whole conspiracy, if the combination of doctors is made in a successive or secret manner between several persons, it is necessary to establish a conspiracy relationship, and in this case, it is necessary to advance the conspiracy of a crime plan.