The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Defendant

B. The defendant B is not guilty.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although Defendant A1 received money from the victims as stated in the facts charged, Defendant A1 and the misunderstanding of the legal doctrine believe that the content and possibility of profits from the joint Defendant B with respect to earth and stones gathering projects and earth and sand transport projects, and that the contents were true, and that there was no deception by the victims in collusion with B merely explained the contents as they were.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts, misunderstanding the judgment criteria for the crime of fraud and misunderstanding the legal principles as to the joint principal offender.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) In the process of receiving investments from the misunderstanding victims, the issue was that Defendant A and AB jointly made an explanation of the victims and provision of the data, and whether the victims may receive a letter of investment or recover the victims' profit at any time was determined by A’s own decision.

On the other hand, since the instant project itself does not have any possibility of a sexual history or business feasibility, the Defendant cannot be held liable for accomplices in fraud only with the fact that the Defendant was involved in the instant project.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the fact about the role of the defendant's business in this case, whether the defendant has conspired or not, and the intention of fraud.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on Defendant A’s misunderstanding of facts, determination of misapprehension of the legal doctrine) The deception as a requirement for fraud of the relevant legal doctrine is the belief and good faith that is to be followed in the transactional relationship of property.