The judgment below

All part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and for four months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) There is no intention to commit fraud or fraud by misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, and Co-Defendant B was forged and used by Co-Defendant B with respect to the forgery and use of private document, and the above Defendant was unaware of the forgery itself. 2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Each sentence (two years of imprisonment with prison labor, six months of imprisonment with prison labor) declared by the prosecutor by the court below is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. Ex officio determination

A. According to the records on the determination as to whether the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is concurrent crimes, the Defendants were sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant A for ten years at the Seoul High Court on June 26, 2019, and three years for Defendant B’s imprisonment, respectively, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 24, 2019.

The final and conclusive crime of fraud and each of the crimes of this case shall be sentenced to punishment for each of the crimes of this case in consideration of equity in the case of concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, with regard to the relationship between the latter part of Article 37

Therefore, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

B. Around March 30, 2018, the Defendant posted a false information on the summary of the facts charged regarding Defendant A’s fraud at the office of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, under the title of “M” at the P2P platform operated by the said company, and “M” to the borrower for the purpose of the completion fund of the building located in the Gyeonggi-do City if investment is made in the said product, and then to receive and distribute the principal and interest from the said borrower as the information on the P2P product.”

However, the above Defendant received investment funds by pretending to use the investment funds for a specific purpose as above, and intended to use them for the purpose of repaying existing investment funds, etc. However, as if posted on the platform, the Defendant did not intend to lend the borrower with building completion funds, etc.

Since then, the above Defendant information on investment products posted as above.