All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the charges on the following grounds: misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (defendant B1) of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud No. 2-A of the crime in the judgment below) is erroneous or misunderstanding of legal principles.

① Since the Defendant said that “A will complete a loan with KRW 800 million,” thereby participating in the loan and trust of A, the Defendant merely constitutes a victim, and did not deceive and deception the Victim H Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”), and did not intend to commit fraud in collusion with A.

② Since the establishment of a right to collateral security is effective for the Defendant’s share in the instant real estate, the amount of damages should be excluded from the value equivalent to the Defendant’s share in the damaged bank. In such a case, since the total amount of damages suffered by the damaged bank is less than 500 million won, a crime of fraud

(3) The Defendant was granted a total of three loans from the victimized bank, but each of the loans was separately granted, so each of the lending acts constitutes a substantive concurrent crime by establishing each crime of fraud, and it cannot be viewed as a violation of the Act on Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes by combining each of the lending acts.

2) Criminal facts No. 2 of the judgment of the court below

B. (2) At the time of the event and fraud of the above investigation document, Q I was aware that there was no consent from QI, and thus there was no intention to exercise the above investigation document and there was no intention to commit the crime of deception or fraud.

However, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles.

B. The sentence that the court below sentenced (defendant A: 4 years of imprisonment, and Defendant B: 2 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination of Defendant B’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.