The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.

, however, the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although Defendant A’s defense counsel (1) misunderstanding of facts in collusion with Defendant A, Defendant A did not deceiving victims, the lower court found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged by misunderstanding of facts.

(2) Even if the facts charged of unfair sentencing are found guilty, the lower court’s sentence that sentenced 10 months of imprisonment is too unreasonable in light of all the circumstances, such as the degree of Defendant A’s participation in the crime.

B. In light of the fact that Defendant B’s defense counsel (e.g., Defendant B’s attorney) led to the confession of all the facts charged of this case and reflects the depth of his mistake, and most of the money obtained by deception from the victim D, etc., the sentence of the lower court that sentenced one year of imprisonment is too unreasonable.

[Defendant B’s defense counsel (N) asserted that the facts charged in this case against Defendant B are identical to the facts charged before the original judgment at the time of the original judgment and the victim, means, and methods, and thus constitutes a comprehensive crime as a habitual offender at the time of the final judgment, and thus, the judgment of acquittal should be rendered. However, the above assertion is a subsequent argument that was filed after the deadline for submitting the grounds of appeal, and it does not constitute a legitimate ground for appeal, and thus, it does not constitute an error of law in the misapprehension of legal principles in the judgment of the court, as seen earlier.)

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, including the witness D, H, and F’s legal statement in the court below’s decision on the mistake of facts as to Defendant A (1), Defendant A conspired with Defendant B in collusion with the victims as stated in the judgment of the court below is sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged is just, and there is no error as alleged in the above grounds of appeal.

(2) On the assertion of unfair sentencing.