1. All appeals filed by Defendant A, B, and Prosecutor against the part of the judgment below, excluding the compensation order, are dismissed.

2.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (i.e., the Defendant did not have conspired to commit the “Singing” fraud with the Defendant, such as “type”, and the Defendant did not know that the instant act of receiving cash was related to the “Singing” fraud, and only withdrawn after the commission of the commission of the fraud by the Nonindicted Party.

Doh even if the crime of fraud is established, it is not a joint principal offender but a aiding and abetting in light of the degree of participation.

Secondly, the court below recognized the defendant's joint principal offense of fraud. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Defendant B’s mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (i.e., the Defendant did not have conspired to commit a crime of fraud with one’s name misscepters, such as “type”, and did not know that the instant act of cash withdrawal was related to the crime of fraud.

Belgium even if the crime of fraud is established, the receipt of the cash card and the act of cash withdrawal by the defendant is in accordance with the direction of the defendant A, and is merely an assistance and assistance.

Secondly, the court below recognized the defendant's joint principal offense of fraud. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

• The application for compensation in this case is dismissed not only because the amount of damage was not specified but also because the existence or scope of the defendant's liability for compensation is not clear.

C. According to the prosecutor's misconception of facts and misapprehension of the legal principle (as to the defendant C), the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged, such as the fraud of this case, although the defendant could sufficiently recognize the facts that he/she processed the crime of this case.