All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

An application for compensation by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding, misunderstanding of the legal doctrine (1) Defendant A’s endeavor was made, but it was only the fact that the progress of the project was not smooth, unlike expected.

The act of deception was not conducted, and there was no intention to obtain fraud.

(2) Defendant B R [Defendant B’s incorporation on December 22, 2009; hereinafter “R”)

only the investor is the only investor.

There is no fact that he was involved in management.

Victims P or Q Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Q”)

No speech or behavior stated in the facts charged was made to AD, etc. by the representative director.

There was no participation in deception, and there was no intention to acquire fraud.

B. Improper sentencing (1) Defendants’ sentence is too heavy.

(2) The Prosecutor’s sentence to the lower court is too minor.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, the lower court’s determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine added to the grounds for finding the Defendants and the defense counsel’s assertion based on the evidence investigated in the lower court and the appellate trial, the Defendants committed deception of the crimes as indicated in the judgment by Defendant A, and Defendant B also shared the act of execution by jointly processing the crimes of “2015 Go-so 603 Go-so, 2015 Go-so, 2530 Go-so, 2015 Go-so, and 2530 Go-so, and all the Defendants did not intend to

(1) The progress of the instant golf course development project (hereinafter “instant golf course project”) with a size of 1,029,696 square meters in T Il-si.

R Co., Ltd. (which was established on March 19, 1987 and thereafter on May 27, 201, changed its trade name to BK; hereinafter referred to as “BK”).

The wide-area land of the BN (Defendant B is about 1650,000 square meters by its wife and wife at the investigative agency.

m. The owner appears to be the company.

BL Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “BL”) from before around 2008 in relation thereto.

It was promoted throughout the past.

② R is a company separate from K, and is a golf course in this case after the embezzlement case of BL representative director was at issue.