The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant M shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

except that this shall not apply.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each court below’s sentence against the Defendants

1. Defendant C: Imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and confiscation;

2. Defendant D: Imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and confiscation;

3. Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for eight months, suspended execution of two years, community service work and confiscation of one hundred and twenty hours.

4. Defendant M: Imprisonment of eight months is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the prosecutorial statement, etc. of the defendant (the defendant A) in the prosecutorial statement of the defendant (the second prosecutorial statement at the time of suspect interrogation), it is recognized that the defendant had a functional control over the crime by entering into a contract with the CG 305 (hereinafter “the studio of this case”) using the place of the crime of fraud as his name, and by sharing part of the cG 305 (hereinafter “the studio of this case”), which was used as the place of the crime of fraud, and by taking the G into cash as the branch office, and thus, the fact that the defendant participated in the

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that the degree of the defendant's participation is nothing more than aiding and abetting is erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. In order to constitute a joint principal offender under Article 30 of the Criminal Act, it is necessary to implement a crime through a functional control over the functional act based on the joint will as a subjective element. Here, the intention of joint processing is insufficient to recognize another person’s crime and to accept it without restraint, and it should be one of the two to commit a specific criminal act with a joint intent, and it should be transferred to one’s own execution by using another’s act.

On the other hand, the essence of the co-principal is the functional control by division of roles, so the co-principal is the functional control by the co-principal, while the co-principal has a functional control by the co-principal, the other co-principal has no control over the act.