The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10 million, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7 million.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A: one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of community service order, Defendant B’s imprisonment, eight months of suspended execution, two years of suspended execution, and one hundred and twenty hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the judgment, the amount obtained by the Defendants is large amount, and the fact that the Defendants did not fully recover from damage is disadvantageous to the Defendants.

On the other hand, however, the defendants appeared to have an attitude to recognize and reflect their mistakes, and they appear to have been smoothly agreed with the victims, and in the case of Defendant A, they appear to have been trying to recover the full damage to the victim E by repaying the damage to the victim E in the first instance, and there are no criminal records and records of the same kind in excess of fines against the defendants.

In addition, the lower court’s punishment seems to be somewhat inappropriate in full view of all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument in the instant case, including the Defendants’ age, environment, sex, circumstances after the crime, and whether the change of circumstances occurred after the sentence of the lower judgment.

Therefore, the defendants' arguments are justified.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendants' appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

[Grounds for a new judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence, and thus, the summary of evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Defendant A’s choice of punishment: Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud as indicated in the holding), Article 347(1) (the point of fraud as indicated in the holding), Article 347(2) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud as indicated in the holding), Defendant B who selected each fine: Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act; the choice of fines;

1. Aggravated concurrent crimes: