The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment of one year and six months, Defendant B’s imprisonment of one year and two months, and Defendant C of 10 months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to fraud (1) fraud (1) there is no fact that the Defendants (Defendant A and B) did not talk about the victim G about the quantity or price of scrap metal. 2) As to the embezzlement, the Defendant (Defendant D) obtained ex post facto approval on the sale of scrap metal from the victim G, and thus does not constitute the element of embezzlement or the illegality is dismissed.

In addition, since the defendant used the entire amount to dismantle the cash embezzled by the defendant, there is no intention to obtain illegal profits.

3) As to the joint intimidation, the Defendants did not take a bath against the victim G, and even if there was a fact that the Defendants attempted to make a certain speech or attempted to file a complaint as a crime of false accusation, this constitutes an act at a certain level or an exercise of legitimate rights, and thus, constitutes a crime of intimidation is not established. 4) As to the joint intimidation, the Defendants did not have any fact of intimidation against the victim (the Defendants) and the said victim cannot be deemed to have conducted a disposition of property in the state of appearance by intimidation.

B. Each sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (one and half years of imprisonment for Defendant A, one and half years of imprisonment for Defendant B, ten months of imprisonment for Defendant C, and one year of imprisonment for Defendant D) are excessively unreasonable.

(2) In the case of the defendant C, the defendant's defense counsel asserted only mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as the grounds for appeal on the first trial date of the first trial, but prior to such assertion, the above defendant's defense counsel submitted to the original court and stated the purport of unfair sentencing in the statement of grounds for appeal submitted before resignation, etc., and thus, the defendant's defense counsel also claims unfair sentencing.

A. The defendants and the defense counsel of the defendants against the defendants A and B's assertion of fraud are the reasons for appeal in this part of the judgment below.