All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (i) There was no intention to mistake mistake of facts with respect to the Defendant.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of community service, 120 hours of imprisonment) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (Definite or misunderstanding of legal principles) alleged that the sentence of the lower court (10 months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of social service, 120 hours) is too unreasonable on the first trial date, but this is a assertion after the lapse of the period for submitting the grounds of appeal, and thus, it is subject to the judgment of this court only in the sense of urging ex officio departure.

The defendant's money received was used as capital for joint business, and the business was actually conducted and some sales were made.

The joint business was intended to carry on the supply business of machinery tools, and the defendant was not aware of the establishment of H, which is the primary cooperative, and there was no contest in the deception of A on this.

In addition, the Defendant was practically capable of operating the business of supplying machinery tools, and the victim, who is an investment expert, was subject to the A’s statement, cannot be deemed to have reached the investment of this case.

2. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and Defendant B’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, namely, that the victim was aware of the fact while working in the same consulting industry since 1995, and the victim was aware of K and Defendant B at around October 2012 upon introduction of Defendant A [On the other hand, Defendant A became aware of K around August 2012 (or around May 6, 2012, 191, 200, 191, 2 of the trial record) and was introduced Defendant B through K at around that time. The victim was introduced from the investigative agency to this court, and from that time, Defendant A directly met Defendant A’s vice-chairperson D of the Group C from that time.