The judgment below

Of the Defendants, the part of innocence against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendant

A. In six months of imprisonment, Defendant B.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principle as to the acquittal portion in the judgment of the court below) reveals that the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, although the court below fully recognized the fact that the defendant had had the intent and ability to issue a written expert opinion desired by the victim, and thereby, acquitted the victim of

[In the judgment of the court below, the conviction which was sentenced to a fine in the judgment of the court below is excluded from the object of the judgment of this court after the prosecutor withdrawss an unfair argument that is the sole

2. Of the judgment of the court below, Defendant A was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud in the Jung-gu District Court Goyang Branch on November 23, 201, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on April 6, 2012. On September 14, 2012, the judgment was finalized on November 30, 2012 after having been sentenced to six months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Jung-gu District Court on September 14, 2012. On April 3, 2014, Defendant A was sentenced to one year of suspension of the execution of four months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Seoul East East District Court on April 11, 2014.

Defendant

B On July 4, 2013, the Seoul Western District Court sentenced five months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Seoul Western District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 29, 2013, and on November 28, 2013, the Seoul Western District Court sentenced two years of suspended execution to one year of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Seoul Western District Court on November 28, 2013, and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 20, 2014.

A. Defendant A’s sole criminal administrationJ listened to the fact that the Victim K wants to borrow the instant land outside Gyeonggi-do L and three lots (hereinafter “instant land”) as collateral, and received documents necessary for appraisal, such as a certified copy of the real estate register, from the victim at the Home Plus 1 floor restaurant located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, and received on October 201, 201.

J, a person who is well aware of land appraisal, shows each of the documents that he suffered from the damage and is able to grant a loan through land appraisal.