All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. According to the records on the judgment on Defendant A and B’s appeal, Defendant A submitted a petition of appeal without stating the grounds for appeal against each of the lower judgment on April 25, 2016, and Defendant B submitted a petition of appeal on April 26, 2016. Defendant A was served on June 13, 2016, and Defendant B was served on the domicile of the Defendants stated in the petition of appeal on May 16, 2016, and each written notice of receipt of a trial record was served on each of the Defendants on May 16, 2016, and it can be recognized that each of them did not submit the grounds for appeal within 20 days from each of the lawful period for submission of the grounds for appeal, and no other ground for ex officio

Therefore, the appeal by the defendant A and B should be dismissed in accordance with Article 361-4 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, but as long as the prosecutor's appeal is ruled, the appeal by the defendant A and B shall be dismissed in the judgment.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal by Defendant C and Prosecutor

A. Prosecutor 1) The victim’s prosecutorial statement that was held at the notary office at the time of borrowing the mistake of facts as well as the victim’s prosecutorial statement that was held by the notary office at the time of borrowing the error of facts cannot be readily concluded that Defendant B did not have the name of Defendant B in the notary office on February 3, 2014, on the ground that the name of Defendant B was not stated in the notary office. Defendant B could have predicted that other Defendants borrowed at least KRW 50 million, and thus, it cannot be readily concluded that Defendant A had the intent to acquire the Defendant B with regard to the amount of KRW 20 million additionally borrowed, there was an error of mistake of facts in the lower court’s determination of facts. (2) The sentence of each of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment with labor for Defendant A and two years of suspended execution, two years of imprisonment with labor for Defendant B and suspended execution, and two years of imprisonment with labor for Defendant C and suspended execution for October

B. The sentence of the lower court’s judgment is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable.

3. On February 3, 2014, the lower court determined the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts, as to the part exceeding KRW 50 million of the amount acquired by deceit out of the facts of fraud by Defendant B.