The guilty portion of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant

B Imprisonment with prison labor of one and half years, Defendant .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the judgment of the court below of first instance, in light of the fact that the above defendant notified the defendant B of the method of crime, introduced personal information sellers, allowed him to use his mobile phone in the crime, and substituted the order, etc., the above defendant is deemed to have participated in the crime B as a joint processing and implementation intention beyond the easy commission of the crime under B. Thus, the above defendant constitutes a joint principal offender who is not an aiding and abetting offender. 2) The judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (the two sides): Defendant B - 10 months imprisonment, and Defendant A- 8 months imprisonment.

B. As to the judgment of the court below of the second instance, each crime of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles against the defendants (the defendants) committed a single and continuous crime under the single and comprehensive intention, and thus, it constitutes a case in which a prosecutor again instituted a public prosecution for the guilty part among the judgment of the court of the court of the second instance as to the crime of the judgment of the court of the court of the first instance since it constitutes a case in which the prosecution again instituted a public prosecution for the crime of the conviction part among the judgment of the court of the court of the second instance, and thus, the prosecution for the crime of the conviction part among the judgment of the court of the court of the court of the second instance should be dismissed. In addition, there is no evidence to deem that the physical card of the judgment of the court of the second instance was used, and there is no evidence to support that the crime was committed by a third party. The judgment of the court of the second instance is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts that the court below rejected the prosecution part of the judgment of the court of the court below as to the crime of the first instance and the concurrent crime.