Of the judgment of the first instance, the part on the defendant A and the second judgment shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant except the defendant who falls under each paragraph of the defendant A or below shall indicate only his name.

1) misunderstanding of facts [the second original judgment (Fraud)] Defendant borrowed KRW 150 million from the victim, 6.5 billion loan from the agricultural cooperative in Busan Busan and the agricultural cooperative in the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “instant loan”) at the time of borrowing KRW 150 million from the victim.

(ii) Since there was a belief that the Defendant would have been sexual intercourse, there was no intention to acquire by deception. Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. (ii) The sentence sentenced by each lower court of unfair sentencing (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and 1 year of suspended execution and 2 years of suspended execution: one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (the first instance judgment) 1) misunderstanding of facts (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (the fact that the Defendant was in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes) 1 ) the Defendant received KRW 10 million from A as part of the subcontracted construction cost performed by the Defendant. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant on the basis of the statement, etc. of A without credibility that the Defendant provided the said money in return for the provision of the loan to G in the Agricultural Cooperatives was erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence of imprisonment (the imprisonment with prison labor for August, the suspension of execution for 2 years

C. The sentence imposed by the first instance court on the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on Defendant A

A. Ex officio determination of this court conducted a joint hearing on the part of the judgment of the first instance and each appeal case of the judgment of the second instance. Each of the offenses in the judgment of the court below is a concurrent offense relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment, which has increased concurrent offenses in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the above judgment of