The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

Defendant

B.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) The misunderstanding of the facts and the legal principles did not deceiving the victims, and at the time of the next use, the Defendant had the ability and intent to pay KRW 500 million to the victims due to the financial situation of the Plaintiff at the time of the next use, but there was no intention to commit the crime of defraudation merely because of the sudden decrease of sales and the failure to fully pay KRW 500 million due to the mers situation around June 5, 2015.

Even if the defendant deceivings the victims to use the borrowed money,

Even if the victims, regardless of them, borrowed KRW 500 million from the defendant, there is no relation between the defendant's deception and the victims' disposal act.

The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. When an appeal against the judgment of conviction against Defendant B is filed, the confirmation of the compensation order shall be prevented even if there is no objection against the compensation order, the compensation order shall be transferred to the appellate court together with the Defendant case, but the Defendant B did not object to the part of the compensation order. Even if ex officio examination was conducted, the grounds for revoking or amending the part of the judgment of conviction cannot be found. Thus, the judgment of the court below

1) The misunderstanding of the facts and the legal principles did not mislead the victims in collusion with the defendant A by neglecting the defendant A's use, nor did the victim have attempted to commit fraud.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court (three years of suspended sentence for two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(c)

The sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendants’ assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, the Defendants’ subjective fraud is against the assertion that there is no relationship between deception, fraud, and fraud.