All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (as to the fraud against X conspiredd with C and conspired with D), the Defendants operated by J (other companies are indicated only in the name of the first company, and thereafter omitted the indication of the corporation) and K Co., Ltd. can supply soil and sand at the construction site M at the construction site. As such, C Co., Ltd. entered in the invoice as if J et al were supplied.

and is not a false invoice.

In addition, the P Co., Ltd or X Co., Ltd was aware of the fact that the Defendants had purchased earth and sand, regardless of whether or not they had purchased them, they had already paid the supply price determined. As such, the supply price already determined was paid, there was no causal relation between the deception and the fraud, and there was no loss.

Nevertheless, the defendants submitted a false invoice to obtain the price of supply of earth and sand from the victim P and X

In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misunderstanding of facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the illegal Defendants (two years of suspended sentence in October, and two years of suspended sentence in one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, P or X, the fact that P or X did not need to pay the price of earth and sand to J or K for earth and sand that C and D brought into the site of M to the stage of M without going through the Defendants. Nevertheless, D had C keep the invoice for earth and sand brought into the site of the stage, and delivered it to the Defendants, as if the Defendants brought into the site, the Defendants were to claim the price of soil and sand supplied to P or X. P or X with the knowledge that P or X had the supply price for earth and sand supplied by J and K, with the knowledge of the fact that the Defendants brought into the site of supply to the soil and sand supplied by J and K.