The judgment below

Among them, the guilty part against Defendant A (including the acquittal part for each reason, excluding the application part for compensation order) and the application part for compensation order.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A, B, and B explicitly withdrawn all of their arguments of mistake on the date of the second trial of the trial of the first instance.

F The sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendants (ten months of imprisonment with prison labor and four years of imprisonment with prison labor, ten months of imprisonment with prison labor, and eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant F) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C1) The victim N will first lend KRW 100 million to the misunderstanding victim N.

The proposal was received only, and the victim N was deceiving the victim N, and the fraud of KRW 100 million has not been made.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant C (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(c)

On September 6, 2013, a prosecutor (related to the Defendants) committed fraud on the part of the Defendant A, C, D, and F’s victim N on September 6, 2013: According to the evidence, the lower court found that the Defendant N gave money by deception from the said Defendants as to this part of the facts, or acquitted the Defendants by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the intention of fraud.

Defendant

A's violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and Defendant B's violation of the Act on the AY's AY's AY's statement, etc., the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and failing to recognize it as a incomplete trial.

Defendant

The charge of fraud against AB by Defendant A: The lower court found Defendant A to have provided money in the absence of error in the actual purpose of use or the economic ability of Defendant A due to his deception, but the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on fraud or thereby acquitted.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court against the Defendants (two years of suspended sentence in October, and the remaining Defendants as seen earlier) is too uneasy and unfair.

2. Ex officio determination (defendant A, B) on the grounds of appeal by the defendant A and B.