All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

The judgment below

The part of the compensation order against the Defendants is reversed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding that Defendant B only divided the victim E and personnel, but did not participate in the instant case. Defendant A did not have the intent to commit fraud because he/she had the intention to commit fraud since he/she believed to engage in construction of the instant apartment. Defendant A did not have the intention to commit fraud because he/she had the intention to commit fraud.

B. Sentencing of the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants (for each of six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendants asserted the same purport at the lower court, and the lower court rejected the Defendants’ assertion on the grounds of specific reasons in the lower court’s application of statutes. The lower court stated that: (a) Defendant A was well aware of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court; (b) Defendant A was also unable to participate in any construction work without the right to retention; and (c) the Defendants agreed to return the agreed amount without any condition if the commencement of construction work is impossible within one month from the agreed date after considering such risks; (d) Defendant A, as well as Defendant A, had a financial capability to return the agreed amount received from the damaged person in preparation for the situation in which the agreed amount should be returned, or if so, should have been in custody, he/she consumed the said money for other purposes even if he/she did not have sufficient financial capability; and (b) Defendant A and C also made a statement to the effect that it was involved in the instant case (i.e., to the extent that he/she participated in evidence and evidence No. 180).