All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment of 1 year and 10 months, Defendant E imprisonment of 2 years and 4 months, respectively.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) The Defendant only played the role of withdrawing cash in accordance with the direction of the Bosing Fraud, but did not play the role of communicating the card password, etc. between the Bosing Fraud and the cash withdrawal book, but the lower court determined that the Defendant erred by misapprehending the fact, on the premise that the Defendant served as such.

(2) The punishment sentenced by the court below (two years and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Each sentence of Defendant E and F (Defendant E: Imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years and 6 months, Defendant F: Imprisonment for 2 years and 2 months) declared by the lower court is too unreasonable.

C. (1) Defendant I (1) The lower court, Co-defendant C, D, and H, seeking jobs at Defendant E’s request, did not know that he would have been engaged in any work related to Bosing, and there was no fact that he committed any act related to the crime of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and therefore, Defendant I did not bear the responsibility to commit each of the crimes of this case.

(2) The facts charged (2014No. 547) that the Metephical camtopist (hereinafter referred to as “Mealopon”) administered the Metephical cam (hereinafter referred to as “Mealopon”) are written only on the presumption of a period during which the Mealopon can be administered based only on the result of appraisal, and on the place or method of medication without any specific factual basis. This constitutes a case where the indictment procedure becomes invalid in violation of the provisions of the law because the facts charged are not specified, and thus,

(3) The fact of the above philophone medication (2014dan547) cannot be said to have the criminal intent of the Defendant to commit the philophone medication, since the Defendant was aware of the other person’s philoopopon in the process of drinking the philoopon and drinking, and the philoopon was detected in the result of her hair and urine appraisal.

(4) The first instance court sentenced to the defendant: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and the second instance court: imprisonment for a period of eight months and a surcharge of one hundred thousand won.