The part concerning the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed, respectively.

The defendant shall be sentenced to one year of imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to Defendant (1)’s misunderstanding of facts in the second instance judgment, there was no criminal intent to obtain fraud from Defendant, and this part of the facts charged is without proof of a crime.

In this regard, the second instance court which found the defendant guilty erred by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The punishment of the lower court (the first instance court: 6 months of imprisonment, and the second instance court: 10 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence No. 1 of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor, this Court held the case of appeal by combining each of the judgment below in entirety. Each of the crimes in the first instance judgment and the crimes in the second instance judgment are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, a sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this respect, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance concerning the Defendant cannot be exempted from each reversal.

However, despite such reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's assertion of mistake as to the second judgment of the court below is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. The defendant did not have any intention to commit fraud in relation to the judgment of the second instance.

The argument is asserted.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the second instance trial, i.e., the victim C’s accusation against the Defendant, but the victim C’s statement at the investigative agency related to fraud are consistent and specific since the Defendant’s act and the situation before and after the crime are consistent and specific, credibility is recognized. ② The Defendant also borrowed money from the victim in the name of the deposit, etc., and the monthly payment is to be repaid by the prosecution.

The term "" refers to the following.

At the time, they were working in Air-conditioner companies and received KRW 2 million monthly, and there was no fixed import in the incentive system.