The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) Fact-misunderstanding (1) misunderstanding the Defendants’ fraud: (a) with respect to the fraud of land-related borrowing money, the Defendants do not have conspired to acquire money from E in the name of land purchase fund; and (b) E did not lend money to the Defendants; and (c) made investments in Hongcheon Land and Koyang Land.

② On August 31, 2012, there was no intention to commit fraud against the Defendants with respect to the money borrowed.

(2) Defendant A’s assertion of mistake as to Defendant A’s exercise of the aforementioned investigation document is merely a delivery of the said real estate transaction contract in collusion with Defendant B, by gathering the forged fact of the real estate transaction contract in the name of S and T, and did not use the said investigation document in collusion with Defendant B.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the illegal Defendants (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendants ex officio, the health care unit, and the prosecutor at the trial, which led to the first instance of the facts charged.

(a) (1) 4 in the name of the victim of paragraph 4, and 5 in the name of the victim, “re-locating the name”, and 1-1 in the name of the victim of paragraph 5;

B. (2) In the 4 and 5 conduct referred to in subsections. (4) and 5, an application for permission to amend an amendment to the Bill of Indictment was filed in the name of the victim, and this Court permitted the same, and the subject of the adjudication is changed, and the judgment of the court below cannot be

Nevertheless, the Defendants’ assertion of misunderstanding of facts and violation of the rules of evidence is subject to the deliberation by the party, and this is examined below.

B. In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as well as the following circumstances revealed by the witness E’s statement, determination of the Defendants’ assertion of mistake as to the Defendants’ fraud (1) as to the assertion of mistake as to land-related loan fraud, the amount of money as the cost of purchasing land from the damaged person.