Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against Defendant A and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed in entirety.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. The first instance court and the second instance court rendered a judgment of conviction against Defendant A after having completed a separate hearing with respect to Defendant A, and Defendant A appealed both the judgment of the lower court, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing of the appeal case.

However, since each crime of Defendant A’s resolution of KRW 1 and KRW 2 is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment should be sentenced pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against Defendant A and the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be maintained any more in this respect.

In addition, according to the records, Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment of one year and two months with prison labor in the Daejeon District Court H branch on February 5, 2015, and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 24, 2015, and the crime in the judgment of the second instance against Defendant A is in the concurrent relationship between the crime of fraud for which the judgment became final and conclusive under Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the crime in the judgment of the second instance against Defendant A is determined in consideration of equity and the case of concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, so the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained in this respect.

However, even if there are such reasons for reversal of authority as above, the mistake of the facts of Defendant T and the argument about sentencing, which are irrelevant to this, are still subject to the judgment of this court as the grounds for appeal.

2. Judgment on the grounds of appeal by Defendant T

A. The summary of the grounds for appeal 1) The Defendant did not receive KRW 1,00,00,000 from A, such as the list of offenses Nos. 3 attached to A, and only received KRW 3,20,000,00,000, such as the sequence No. 5 of the same Table.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (2 years of imprisonment with prison labor for six months and fines of 2,500,000) is too unreasonable.

B. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant asserted to the same effect as the lower court.

The court below acknowledged the following based on the evidence in its holding.