1. All the judgment of the court below (excluding the part of the compensation order among the judgment of the court of first instance) shall be reversed.

2. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for five years, and the second instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for one year) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) through misunderstanding of the legal principles, Defendant B did not conspired to commit the crime of defraudation against Defendant A and victim V, and did not have the intent to commit the crime of defraudation.

2) The sentence sentenced by the first instance court to Defendant B (one hundred months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine Defendant A’s ex officio judgment on the grounds for appeal, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by Defendant A.

Defendant

Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act provides that a single sentence shall be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act inasmuch as the first and second original judgment against A was pronounced, and each of the above appeals cases was filed by Defendant A, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings. The crime of each of the above original judgment against Defendant A is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, the first and second original judgment against Defendant A (excluding the part on compensation order among the original judgment of the first instance court) cannot be maintained.

B. Determination as to Defendant B’s misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) The summary of this part of the facts charged is that Defendant A is the representative director of K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K”) and Defendant B is a police officer working in the W Zone of the Seoul Seongbuk Police Station.

The Defendants introduced the creditors to whom Defendant B lent money to K and promised to divide the amount of money borrowed from the credit holder.

Defendant

B around September 25, 2012, the victim V located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government X is the representative director, and the victim is expected to receive approximately KRW 20 billion annual supply from K Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha