The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

, however, the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the prosecutor's specific and consistent statement of the victim, co-defendant B and H's partial statement, etc. as to the acquittal portion of Defendant A, the facts charged of this case in which the defendant accused by deceiving the victim with Co-defendant B is found guilty.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant on the grounds that it is difficult to accept only the defense of the defendant and to recognize the crime of defraudation is erroneous and has affected the judgment.

B. Part 1 as to Defendant B) When considering the various circumstances of Defendant B, the sentence of the lower court (one month of imprisonment) is too unreasonable, and is deemed unreasonable. 2) When considering the various circumstances of the examination, the sentence of the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination on the prosecutor’s appeal against the acquittal portion of Defendant A

A. On December 24, 2009, in collusion with Co-Defendant B, the summary of the facts charged, the Defendant stated that “No down payment is made to have 100 apartment units unsold in lots in the G,” and that “the victim F, who borrowed KRW 20 million until January 10, 2010, would make a repayment by borrowing KRW 20 million, and if the loan is not made by the above date, the Defendant would make a payment by adding KRW 20 million to KRW 40 million.”

However, in fact, the Defendants failed to provide funds for purchasing 100 households of unsold apartment units, and did not verify whether the unsold apartment units actually exist, so even if they borrowed money from the victims, they did not intend to purchase 100 households of unsold apartment units and pay the money borrowed from the victims.

The Defendant and B, as such, enticed the victim, and then acquired the victim by transfer from the victim to the Defendant’s bank account on the same day.

B. The lower court’s judgment also states that ① the Defendant around November 26, 2009.