The part concerning Defendant A, B, and C among the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant

A. Imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants 1) Defendant A (the judgment of the court of first instance: Imprisonment with prison labor for three years and six months, and imprisonment for six months: imprisonment with prison labor for the court of second instance) and each of the following punishments, which the court of first instance sentenced by the court of first instance against the Defendants, B, C, D, E, and F (the judgment of the court of first instance on the judgment of the court of first instance: unreasonable sentencing: the following punishments, which the court of first instance sentenced by the court of first instance on the Defendants, are too unreasonable.

Defendant

B and C: Imprisonment for 2 years, Defendant D and E: Imprisonment for 1 year: Six months.

B. Prosecutor 1) Of the first instance judgment, the first instance court acquitted Defendants E and F on the ground that the Defendants’ intentional act cannot be acknowledged as to the Defendants’ intentional act of aiding and abetting the fraud. According to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the first instance court erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles, since the Defendants’ intentional act of aiding and abetting the fraud can be acknowledged.

B) As to the judgment of the court of first instance on the Defendants, each of the above types of punishment sentenced by the court of first instance is too uneasible and unfair: The above types of punishment sentenced by the court of second instance on Defendant A is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor in relation to the defendant A, prior to the judgment.

The first and second judgment against the defendant was pronounced, and the defendant and the prosecutor appealed against the second judgment on the grounds of unfair sentencing, and this court decided to concurrently deliberate on the above two appeals cases.

However, since each crime recognized by the court of original judgment against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant and the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be maintained as it

B. Defendant E, and Defendant E.