All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing);

가. 사실 오인 또는 법리 오해의 점 ⑴ 피고인 A ㈎ 피해자 한국무역보험공사에 대한 사기의 점( 주장 Ⅰ) 피고인은 F가 외국에 물건을 수출할 의사와 능력이 없이 피해자 한국무역보험공사로부터 허위로 수출신용 보증서를 발급 받고 이를 담보로 은행에서 대출 받는 다는 사실을 전혀 알지 못하고, F가 지시하는 대로 F가 준비한 수출 물품을 별도의 물품 검사 없이 선적하는 등 단순히 수출업무 등을 진행한 것에 불과하므로, 피고인에게 편취의 범의가 있다고

subsection (b) of this section.

㈏ 피해자 N에 대한 사기의 점( 주장 Ⅱ) 피고인이 수출자금 마련을 위하여 N로부터 3,500만 원을 빌린 것은 사실이나 변제기 등을 약정하지 않고 벽돌 조적 기 수출업무와 관련하여 신용장을 받아 수익이 나면 변제하겠다고

It was said that only the case did.

Therefore, even though the defendant promoted a brick export business, it is merely a failure to pay the above money because the issuance of the letter of credit has not been done as a result of the fact that the defendant did not intend to do so, there is a criminal intent of defraudation by the defendant.

subsection (1) of this section.

D. Defendant B (except the list Nos. 4 in the crime No. 4 attached to the first instance trial) was aware that the Defendant actually engaged in a trade business with a large amount of Defendant A, and did not know that the Defendant was issued a false export credit guarantee without the intent and ability to export goods to a foreign country. As such, there was a criminal intent to commit fraud.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. Each sentence of the first deliberation on sentencing (Defendant A: 5 years of imprisonment, Defendant B: 3 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. (i) As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court on the assertion of Defendant A I and Defendant B, i.e., the Defendants themselves.