The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.

Defendant of the Prosecutor.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the fraud of R among the facts charged in the instant case by the public prosecutor, in a case where R was supplied to an enterprise made by the Defendants in collusion and acquired the price by deceit, it is reasonable to view that the Defendants also knew about the supply of R’s goods and the fraud of the price. However, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants on the charge of erroneous determination of facts.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's grounds for appeal

A. The summary of the facts charged (R's fraud) Defendants, G, and H (inhuman matters) made a mutual distribution company called "J" No. 112 of the I building in Gyeyang-gu, Young-gu, Yangyang-gu, Yangyang-si, by creating a distribution company of the first upper price of the I building 112, and offered a public offering to sell the goods and acquire profits by disposing of the said goods.

As a result, G leased the office of the above company, made preparations for the operation of the above company by lending the name of K and L, and made the business registration of the above company, and Defendant A will take charge of disposing of the goods supplied, Defendant B will take charge of loading and unloading goods supplied, and H will take charge of ordering goods.

Therefore, the Defendants, G, and H had taken an attitude that they would normally pay the full amount of the price to the victim R R on November 12, 2012, with November 12, 2012, the Defendants, G, and H had been supplied from the victim R on November 7, 2012, an amount equivalent to KRW 19,500,000, 1,000,000 at the square of Mannam-si on November 7, 2012, but did not have any intent or ability to pay the price even if the goods were supplied as above.

As a result, the Defendants, in collusion with G and H, by deceiving the victim R, received property amounting to KRW 19.5 million from the victim R.

B. The lower court’s judgment is the evidence that seems to correspond to the facts charged in the instant case.