The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four years, by imprisonment for one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (unfair sentencing): The lower court’s sentence is too heavy.

B. Defendant B (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of sentencing): The court below found Defendant B guilty on the remainder of the facts charged (the part of the joint crime with Defendant A and C, and the part of the victim AP and AX among the sole crime) with the exception of the fraud with the victim G and H among the facts charged against Defendant B, but did not have the intent to deception, but there is an error of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

The sentence of the court below is too heavy.

(c)

The prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing): The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendants A and B of some frauds against the victim AH (amount of damage KRW 4 million) and the defendants of the frauds against the victim I among the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendants is too minor.

2. When the prosecutor made an ex officio judgment (an amendment of indictment to Defendant A and B), the prosecutor filed an application to change the amount of damage from KRW 18.750,00 to KRW 63.755,00 among the facts charged in the instant case, to change the amount of damage caused by Defendant A and B’s fraud from KRW 18.750,00,00,000. Since this court permitted the change, the conviction portion against Defendant A and B in the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, the defendant B's misunderstanding of facts and the argument of misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

3. Judgment on Defendant B’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. This part of the facts charged is that Defendant B conspireds with Defendant A and C under the pretext of this part of the facts charged, or by itself deceptions victims into victims in the course of selling the Seoul Jongno-gu O Forest and Sejong Land.

The court below's duly adopted and examined evidence is acknowledged as follows.