The judgment below

Among them, the part against Defendant A (excluding the part rejecting an application for compensation order) shall be reversed.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding the facts regarding the part of fraud under the pretext of an indecent act, such as the rescission of the contract, or misunderstanding the legal doctrine, or failing to comply with the performance of the contract, such as the surrender of the contract.

It is most aimed at the consolation or evaluation of the mind that is gained in direct or indirect participation in the process rather than demanding the achievement of any result in the execution of an intangible deed.

exceptionally subject to the fulfillment of any purpose;

Even if it is an act of non-speed which is generally undertaken by the industry and has not been achieved as a subjective intention to achieve that objective, unless it is intended to achieve that objective.

In addition, it is difficult to conclude that the exercise of the right to demand the performance of the contract, etc.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Defendant

A has performed all acts without delay, such as the acceptance of the contract or the instrument requested by the victims.

In addition, the victim K had been already experienced in requesting indecent acts before finding Defendant A, and the defendant A was introduced to the victim L, M, etc. of his own, his own, and his own, his own, and the money.

The victims have been well aware that their concerns may not be resolved all by requesting indecent acts to the unauthorized persons.

The victims have received a large amount of money and valuables by Defendant A, and there are many times to receive money and valuables on the ground of an indecent act.

One of the arguments, the cost is different according to the performance of the contract, and the victims requested the defendant A to perform the act without delay over several years.

Therefore, even if Defendant A received money and valuables from victims under the pretext of indecent act, such as the acceptance of the contract, it shall not be deemed that Defendant A deceiving victims and acquired the property by deceiving them.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby convicting Defendant A of this part of the facts charged.

(2) As to the violation of the Medical Service Act and the part on fraud caused thereby.