The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for five years, for three years, and for one year, for Defendant C.

The grounds of appeal are examined to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental reasons for appeal not timely filed.

Defendant

A When referring to the defendant of the pertinent item below the A, his name shall be omitted, and the defendant shall be recorded only in his name.

In fact, the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes is a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes.

(B) On April 17, 2013, the Defendant did not deceiving the victim during the process of receiving a loan of KRW 25 billion in total from J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant loan”) from the victim who suffered damage on April 17, 2013 (hereinafter “the instant loan”).

Specifically, in the case where (1) out of 6 billion won of loans to F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), the part that did not use 2.725 billion won out of 6 billion won as the acquisition price of shares of G, and did not violate the terms and conditions of loans by dedicated to repayment of loans equivalent to 23.5 billion won against G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul”), which was used by the Defendant for acquiring G, and used differently from the purpose of loan

It is difficult to see it.

② In the case of the part that the Defendant, while being aware of such fact, was unaware of the Defendant’s obligation to G Company I (hereinafter “I”) and the second-class pledge right established by G shares as security, the Defendant’s loan of this case was implemented by deeming that there was no difficulty in securing the first-class pledge right of shares despite being aware of such fact. The Defendant’s deception was not due to the Defendant’s deception of the victim.

③ In the case where the Defendant violated the terms and conditions of the loan by obtaining an additional loan of KRW 1.2 billion from around the Republic of Korea on the date of the instant loan (hereinafter “the instant additional loan”), the victim amounted to KRW 19 billion to the Defendant’s loans to the Defendant for the purpose of repaying the loan for the existing Gyeongnam.