The judgment below

Among them, the part against Defendant A and the special intimidation against Defendant B (the crime No. 1 of the judgment).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of facts (1) : The Defendant did not intimidation the victim I and did not intend to make intimidation.

(2) Fraud: The defendant did not deceiving the victim L and did not have the intention to commit the crime of defraudation.

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts (1) : The Defendant did not conspired with Defendant A to commit a crime.

(2) Fraud (a third crime in judgment): The defendant was not accused of the victim, nor was he/she had the intention to deception.

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing [the sentence of the first crime (special intimidation): 1 year of imprisonment; 3 years of imprisonment with prison labor; and 5 million won of fine] is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to Defendant A’s assertion of mistake as to special intimidation, the defendant can use a knife as stated in the judgment below and recognize the facts of intimidation of victim I. Thus, the defendant’s assertion of mistake as to this part of the facts is without merit.

B. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake as to the fraud of KRW 70 million around March 30, 201 and KRW 20 million in early June 201, Defendant A’s assertion of mistake as to the fraud of KRW 20 million, the lower court would allow the Defendant to enter into a subcontract for the construction of Q shop if he/she invested money to the Victim L as stated in the lower judgment.

On March 30, 2011, the fact that he/she acquired 70 million won or around March 30, 201 from the above victim, or 20 million won or more from the early June 201, can be recognized.

The defendant's assertion that this part of the facts is false is without merit.

(c)

On October 201, 201, Defendant A’s assertion of mistake as to the fraud of KRW 50,000,000, which was based on the following facts: (1) the summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (b) the Defendant: (c) the introduction of N, a branchr around March 201, to the victim L and thereafter became aware of the fact; and (d) the Japan-dong-gu, Busan-gu,