The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

seizure.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (part of misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of legal principles) 1) misunderstanding of facts and deception of the victim M by the judgment of the court below, the Defendant did not have taken part in this part of the charges at all. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (three years of imprisonment, etc.) against Defendant B (unfair imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

C. The public prosecutor (an unreasonable sentencing on both the defendants)'s sentence imposed by the court below on the defendants is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is not required under the law, and there is a combination of two or more co-offenders who intend to jointly process and realize a crime. Although there is no process of the whole conspiracy, if the combination of intent is made in order or impliedly, it is established if the agreement is made, and even those who did not directly participate in the act of the commission are held accountable as co-principal for the other co-principal’s act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Do1706, Sept. 12, 1997). Such intent of co-processing is insufficient to recognize the other co-principal’s crime and allow it without any restriction (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Do576, Apr. 7, 200; 200Do576, etc.).