The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for three years and for two years and six months, respectively.

Defendant .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s punishment against Defendant A ( Imprisonment with prison labor for three years and six months and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) In light of the misapprehension of the legal principle, and the background and role of Defendant B’s crime, Defendant B does not constitute a crime of joining and operating a criminal organization. ② The crime of fraud of this case and the crime of joining and operating a criminal organization is in an ordinary concurrent crime. (2) The lower court’s sentence against Defendant B of unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The crime of fraud of this case, joining a criminal organization, and joining a criminal organization is an ex officio judgment. After the Defendants joined a criminal organization of Bophishing, the Defendants conspired with the members of the criminal organization, such as counselors, etc., and acquired money from the victims in collusion. Since each crime of fraud, joining a criminal organization, and committing activities committed by the Defendants constitutes several crimes, the crime of fraud, joining a criminal organization, and joining a criminal organization constitutes a regular concurrent crime as prescribed in Article 40 of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that applied this to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code is erroneous in finding the number of crimes, so the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the argument of misunderstanding the legal principles that defendant B's joining and activities are not established is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

B. The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding Defendant B’s assertion that the crime of joining and running a criminal organization is not established, namely, ① the Defendant may impose a lot of money for a sports soil-related work in China around June 19, 2016, upon I’s proposal and depart from China, and EN and I in China.