The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the misapprehension of the legal principle, the Defendant did not have a intention to jointly process or functional control over the part of the investment amount A recruited by a higher-tier investor.

Therefore, the remaining portion, except the sum of the investment amount of 10.477 billion won, such as investors who directly recruited by the defendant, their investors, and their relatives recruited by the defendant, shall not be liable for the crime as a joint principal offender.

B. Since the amount of a similar receipt recognized in the first instance judgment for sentencing contains a substantial portion of the amount of re-investment of the victims, the first instance judgment punishment (one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable if it is considered that the amount of investment actually recruited, excluding the amount of re-investment overlapped.

2. Determination

A. (1) As to the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the conspiracy in which more than two persons of the relevant legal principles jointly process the crime does not require any legal penalty, but only if two or more persons conspired to jointly process a certain crime and to realize the crime, the conspiracy is a combination of intent to realize the crime. As such, there was no process of

In light of the above legal principles and the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated at the court of first instance in light of the above legal principles, even if the defendant, as alleged by the defendant, made an investment in G (hereinafter “G”) in the act of another competitor, even if he did not directly participate in the implementation since such a conspiracy was conducted, he/she is held liable as a joint principal offender for the act of another competitor (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do2144, Jun. 1, 2007, etc.).