All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendants were aware of the fact in an ambiguous manner, and the Defendants followed the instructions of the name and the name and the name and the name and the name and the name.

In the end, there was no fact that the Defendants were recruited as a joint principal offender for the crime of Bosing, and there was no functional control over it.

The punishment of the court below (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and April, and Defendant B for a year) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated in the lower court’s determination as to the assertion of mistake, the Defendants, while recognizing the fact that the instant crime was a Bosing crime, play a role of delivering cash in accordance with the instructions of the name-free winners during the entire commission of the crime, thereby making a public offering in order and implied manner with the accomplices as to the entire crime, and sufficiently recognizing the fact that the Defendants were a joint principal offender who has performed functional control through substantial contribution.

Ultimately, this part of the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

Defendant

A At the time, the Defendant did not check the name of the company or the office that the principal works.

② The Defendant’s role was to receive a relatively high amount (6% of the total amount) in return for the mere fact, even though the Defendant received money in return for the receipt of the money from a designated person following the receipt of the money in return for the receipt of the money in return for the receipt of the said money.

③ The Defendant exercised the victim’s official document under the name of the Chairman of the Financial Services Commission, as if he were an employee of the Financial Supervisory Service directly.

④ The Defendant also received forged documents from a person in a name in the investigative agency, demanded the Financial Supervisory Service to set the same string as the string from a person in a name in the name in the name, and had the prosecutor take the direction that the string fraud was committed, and had the prosecutor take the view that the string fraud was committed.

(f) a statement.

Defendant

B. Defendant 1