1. The part of the judgment below against Defendant A, B, D, and F shall be reversed.

2. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for three years and Defendant A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence sentenced by the court below to the above Defendants A, B, D, and F (i) imprisonment with prison labor for three years, (ii) imprisonment for two years and six months, (iii) imprisonment with prison labor for two years and six months, and (iv) imprisonment with prison labor for two years, and (viii) imprisonment with prison labor for eight months) is too unreasonable.

(B) The defendant D had asserted that there was an error of misunderstanding of facts in the judgment of the court below, but withdrawn the above argument on the second trial of the court of the first instance.

1) According to the erroneous determination of facts (as to Defendant C), the investigation agency of Defendant BE and Defendant F, or each statement at the court of original instance, etc., the court below, despite being aware that Defendant C would be used for committing the instant fraud loan, provided the name of the lending and offered the loan so that Defendant C could obtain the loan from the Defendant WW Saemaul Depository, the court below acquitted Defendant C of the facts charged. The court below erred in misunderstanding of facts. 2) The judgment of the court below was erroneous in misunderstanding of facts (as to Defendant A), and the sentence imposed on Defendant A is too uneasible.

2. Determination

A. As to the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts, even if the Defendant C, along with A, B, Q, R, and S, did not have the intent or ability to repay the loan even if the loan was granted from the financial institution, the Defendant C applied for the loan to the financial institution by making a high appraisal by using a false sales contract, pretending that the real estate was purchased without any intention to purchase it, and instead, instead, he applied for the loan to the financial institution.

Defendant

C A, B, Q, R, etc., along with A, on October 2012, 2012, for the fourth-story neighborhood living facilities, and B, without the intention to purchase the above building, made the statement to the purport that “B will purchase at least one billion won” to U.S. who is the owner of the building, and then offered it as a security for a loan to A who is a broker of a financial institution through Q, R, and S.