Defendant

B, C, and Prosecutor’s Appeal are all dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

B and C(unfair form of punishment) The sentence of the lower court (three years of imprisonment, three years of imprisonment, and three years and four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles in the judgment of the court below, even though the defendant A participated as a co-principal in the crime of fraud against the victim AE by the defendant, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles in the judgment of the court below.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (as against the defendant) by the court below (as against the defendant, three years of imprisonment, three years and four months of imprisonment, one year and six months of imprisonment, and three million won of fine) is too uneasable and unfair.

Judgment

The lower court determined the Prosecutor’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine: (a) the Defendant B asked the Defendant A to provide the account so that the defrauded may actually acquire the money by deceiving the victim AE and then transferred the money through the AF account; and (b) recognized the fact that the Defendant A provided the Defendant B with his own name in response thereto; and (c) determined that Defendant A took part in the crime of aiding and abetting the Defendant B’s own name, and that it is insufficient to view that Defendant A took part in the division of duties through functional control with the intention of joint processing.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court below closely by comparing it with the records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and it is not recognized that there is an error of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged in the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor.

This part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

Defendant

B, C, and prosecutor’s criminal act of this case on the assertion of unfair sentencing against Defendant B, C, C, and D, by deceiving the seller and buyer on gift certificates and gold transactions, shall acquire money in a considerable amount of money, and through the Internet commodity transaction website.