Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. Defendant 1 did not recognize the fact that the Defendant took part in part in the crime of Bosing fraud, and thought that the Defendant merely took part in the business of collecting money on behalf of the lending company, it cannot be said that the Defendant had the intention to commit the instant crime. (2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the assertion of mistake of facts is not required under the law regarding the conspiracys that two or more persons jointly process for a crime, but is only a combination of intent to realize a crime through the joint processing of a crime. If the combination of intent is made in a successive or implicit manner, a conspiracy relationship is established if the two or more persons jointly participate in the act of conspiracys, and even those who do not participate in the act of conspiracys, are held liable for criminal liability as a joint principal offender against the other accomplices. Therefore, even if the method of deceptions by frauds has been specifically known (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do5080, Aug. 23, 2013), the public conspiracys cannot be denied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do5080, Aug. 23, 2013). In other words, the Defendant, upon receiving a request from the other party to a crime by telephone advertisement around December 2, 2019, ordered the other party to receive money from the other party’s “as”.