Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the judgment of the court below (excluding the dismissal of an application for compensation) and the second judgment.

The first instance court dismissed the application for compensation of M, an applicant for compensation, and the applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. Thus, the above application for compensation was immediately finalized.

Therefore, the part which rejected the application for compensation among the judgment of the court of first instance is excluded from the scope of adjudication of this court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant had been implementing the Korea-style Building Corporation project, due to the fact that it is difficult to raise funds due to the government’s policy change, etc., the Defendant did not have the intent to acquire by deception each of the facts charged of this case.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court of first instance (three years of imprisonment) and the punishment sentenced by the court of second instance (six months of imprisonment) are too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal for ex officio determination, the first and second judgments were rendered on the Defendant, respectively, and the Defendant appealed each of them, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing on each of the above appeals cases.

However, since each crime of the first and second judgment is one of the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the part of the judgment of the first and the judgment of the second court cannot be maintained as it is.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts against the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2 is still subject to the judgment of the court of this Court, and the following is examined.

B. The Defendant alleged the same purport as the grounds for appeal in the first instance judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, and the first instance court also stated in detail on the part of the 8th to 10th to 10th to 2nd to 8th to 10th to 8th to 10th.