Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Each application for compensation order filed by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed in entirety.

Punishment of the crime

[Judgment of the court below in light of the above legal principles, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the violation of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, and by misapprehending the legal principles as to the violation of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal. The court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the violation of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the violation of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

Defendant

A around the beginning of October 2015, at the public prosecutor’s office, conspired with the public prosecutor, investigator, and the victims to commit the crime in sequence with the above public prosecutor of the public prosecutor’s office from the time of the first public prosecutor’s office, misrepresentation of investigator, and conduct telephone to the victims, and Defendant B conspired with the above public prosecutor of the public prosecutor’s office and investigator of the public prosecutor’s office from the first public prosecutor’s office after receiving a proposal to commit the crime from the above public prosecutor of the public prosecutor’s office and investigator of the public prosecutor’s office from the beginning of September 2017, and conspired with the above public prosecutor of the public prosecutor’s office to act as a telephone to the victims.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Defendant A

A. On August 11, 2017, at the irregular site of China (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Association”) calls the victim C, and misrepresenting the victim C to the investigation team I investigator and the J prosecutor, Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Intelligent Investigation Team I, and falsely concluding that “The Daepbook was discovered in the name of the party at the site of arresting K of the fraud-related crime. The investigation should be conducted on the agenda No. 2017 and No. 8517. The amount deposited in the party’s account should be carried out. To check whether the money deposited in the party’s account is money related to the crime and deliver it to the employee of the Financial Supervisory Service sent by us.”

However, there was no fact that there was no prosecutor or investigator, and there was no fact that the victim was used as a passbook because the victim's name was stolen.

(2) the same day;