All the judgment below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) As to the lower judgment of the first instance court (2014 high 3349), the Defendant only received W in 1 written introduction while raising business funds and received W, and did not know the victims, and did not deceiving the victims.

(2) The lower court’s judgment (2014 high group 7682) related to the facts charged of fraud under the pretext of investment deposit is that the victim, regardless of the Defendant, has invested money in C by soliciting investment from L.

As in the case of the victim, the Defendant was only one of the investors in C, and there was no operation of C or solicitation for investment in the victim as stated in the facts charged.

With respect to the facts charged of fraud in the name of real estate down payment, the victim’s money paid to the Defendant is not a real estate down payment, but an investment was made to AM Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AM”) that the victim would operate, and only the victim who owns 50% of the AM equity and was appointed to the representative director was paid for his/her business.

B. The punishment of the lower court (the first instance judgment: the fine of KRW 2 million, and the second instance judgment: the imprisonment of KRW 6 months) is too unreasonable.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for an ex officio judgment.

The judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance against the defendant were pronounced, and the defendant filed an appeal, respectively, and this court decided to consolidate the two appeals cases.

Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act provides that each crime of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one punishment shall be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be maintained

However, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to a trial at the time, and this is examined in the following items.

3. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts

A. The lower judgment of the first instance (2014 high order 3349).