The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant A and C shall be reversed.

Defendant

A and Defendant C shall be punished by imprisonment of one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts had issued a coophone to customers who found the game of this case with the game of this case. However, although the Defendant did not know the fact that coophones, etc. were exchanged using the said coophones, the Defendant did not have known that coos, etc. were exchanging with the above coophones, and there was no fact of soliciting exchange with the above coobs, coos, etc. on the face of the exchange. (2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (one year and nine months, confiscation, and collection) is too

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts) Although the Defendant issued a coophone to the customers who found the game of this case with the result of the game of this case, the Defendant did not know that he was using the said coophone, etc., and did not have known that he was making a money exchange, and there was no fact that he conspiredd with the above “resbbbbbbb”, “res,” and “moneybre” on the face of the exchange. 2) The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment and additional collection) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

C. Defendant C’s punishment (fine 5 million won) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

The prosecutor (as to the defendant C), the court below's punishment (as to a fine of 5 million won) against the defendant C is too unhued and unfair.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts by Defendant A and B

A. As a matter of course, a joint principal offender under Article 30 of the Criminal Act commits a crime jointly by two or more persons. In order to establish a joint principal offender, it is necessary for the joint principal offender to commit a crime through functional control by a joint doctor, which is a subjective element, and the intention of joint process is to jointly engage in a specific criminal act with the intent to commit a specific criminal act, and to shift one’s own intent by using another’s act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do4792, Nov. 9, 2001). In addition, the joint principal offender does not need to commit a joint principal offender, and each of the accomplices forms the elements of the joint principal offender.