The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

B Imprisonment with prison labor of two years and six months, and Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment of three years and six months, respectively.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (a) was not related to the misunderstanding of facts as to the judgment of the first instance court, misunderstanding of legal principles, Defendant B (a) made an investment of KRW 500 million in relation to W by the victim X, and only delivered the terms and conditions presented by Defendant A, and there was no intentional deception of the victim X in collusion with Defendant A.

In addition, the victim X has invested KRW 500 million in its own judgment on the situation, possibility of repayment, etc., so there is no relationship between the above acts of the defendant B and the victim X damage.

Nevertheless, the court below found Defendant B guilty of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud). It erred by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles on public offering, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Of the judgment of the court below No. 2, Defendant B did not deceiving the victim F with the intent to acquire the above investment money from the victim F in investing KRW 150 million in H related to Asan City, and the sales contract for H 105 and 106 was only provided to the victim F for the purpose of security.

Nevertheless, the second instance court found Defendant B guilty of the crime of fraud against the victim F, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the fact and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

3) Of the judgment of the court below 2, there was no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the crime of breach of trust, nor did Defendant B arbitrarily participated in Defendant A’s change in the order of collective security by the victim I Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim I”).

In addition, the fulfillment of the obligation to establish a collateral security to the victim I pursuant to the agreement on the establishment of a collateral security corresponds to one's own business under the agreement and does not constitute another's business to establish a breach of trust.

Nevertheless, the second instance court against Defendant B I.