The judgment below

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

Defendant

A No. 2019 Godan1719 decided in the lower judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) In determining not guilty of the facts charged against Defendant B, the lower court presented the ground that “the head of an investment vehicle shall not be deemed to be a deception in itself, by changing it into a fertilizer factory, the head of the investment vehicle to an officetel.” Since this is also applicable to Defendant A, it cannot be deemed that there was a deception in relation to the fertilizer company’s investment loan funds.

The lower court rendered a not guilty verdict on Defendant B of the facts charged, that “the victim appears to have lent money in trust of the intent and ability of the Defendants to repay, in particular, Defendant B’s ability to repay,” and in light of this, it is difficult to view that Defendant B, who is jointly and severally liable, was unaware of the lack of sufficient ability to repay and credit to Defendant B, so long as there was insufficient capacity to repay and credit.

B) Although Defendant B, in collusion with Defendant A, participated in a fertilizer company’s investment loan fraud crime, the lower court determined that Defendant A denied the Defendants’ public bid relationship and Defendant A alone committed the act of deception. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. A prosecutor 1) The lower court’s punishment against Defendant A is too unfasible and unfair. 2) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor against Defendant B (Defasible and misunderstanding of legal principles), it can be acknowledged that Defendant B was involved in the Defendant A’s crime with the intent to commit a crime by deceitation. Thus, the lower court acquitted Defendant B of the facts charged, by misapprehending the legal principles, or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination ex officio on Defendant A.