The judgment below

Defendant B, I, J, P, D, H, K, L, Q, R, and S are all reversed.

Defendant

B. Imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant did not actually participate in or did not participate in any phishing crime by any other assistant staff, except for the part in which the Defendant directly participated in the phishing crime, and contributed essentially to the completion of his overall commission of the crime.

Therefore, the defendant's conspiracy relation to this part cannot be recognized.

2) The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) that was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant D1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, upon introduction by a person who has a job, entered China, but refused to do so by becoming aware of the fact that the Defendant had to act as a phishing for the phishing crime. Although the intermediate manager had worked at the phishing office without any choice due to AR’s strong pressure, there was no success in the phishing, the Defendant’s conspiracy relation cannot be acknowledged, and the Defendant cannot be held liable to commit the crime.

2) The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) that was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

M1) Of the facts charged against the Defendant by misunderstanding of facts or misapprehending the legal principles, the two overlaps with the list of crimes in the Cheongju District Court 2015 order 2015 order 2015 order 1236-1 (Separation) order 2015 order 2015 order 1236-1 (Separation) order 2015 order 2015 order 2015 order 2015 order 2015 order 1236-1 (Separation) (hereinafter “relevant case”), among the charges charged against the Defendant, the two overlapping parts are limited to the crimes committed by the assistants belonging to another sing organization.

In addition, during the period of stay in China, the Defendant took part in the criminal conduct of Bosing only during the period from around November 2013 to the end of the end of 2013, and did not take part in the criminal conduct during the other period.

(ii)..