All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) In fact, there is no fact that: (a) the Defendant, misunderstanding the fact, stated that he would make his apartment purchase cost (hereinafter “instant apartment”); and (b) did not mean that he would sell the said apartment in trust with L’s horse; and (c) that he would have the victim bank staff P, “K’s relative and free live, and there is no problem in the loan, as he would have to do so immediately.”

However, the court below, by misunderstanding the facts, acquired the loan by deceiving the victim bank in collusion with B, etc.

there is an error of law in finding the person.

2) The sentence of the lower court (three years and six months of imprisonment) that was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal doctrine, the Defendant was a bad credit holder, and the Defendant was aware that he was given a loan on the ground of the largest purchaser M when filing an application for the loan from the victim bank as security of the instant apartment.

However, the Defendant, in collusion with A, had the right to preferential repayment of KRW 780,000,000,000 on the apartment of this case, and as the lessee was unaware of the fact that A was hiding and was receiving a loan, the Defendant conspired with A to deception the victim bank.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby obtaining loans by deceiving the victim bank by deceiving the victim bank.

there is an error of law in finding the person.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, which found the Defendants’ misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine.

① On December 21, 2015, Defendant A purchased the instant apartment from H with approximately KRW 930 million.

The apartment of this case shall complete the move-in report on November 26, 2015 and reside with H on September 16, 2015 (the lease deposit of KRW 780 million).