The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant E shall be reversed.

Defendant

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

, however, the defendant.

Defendant C was aware that his act was to withdraw the proceeds from illegal sports gambling, and did not have awareness and intent to withdraw the proceeds from the deception due to scam fraud, the judgment of the court below which found Defendant C guilty of fraud among the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant C is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (the imprisonment of 8 months, the suspension of execution of 2 years, the observation of protection, community service 160 hours) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B and E’s sentence (Defendant B: imprisonment of 8 months, 2 years of probation, observation of protection, community service 160 hours, Defendant E’s imprisonment of 1 year) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

The sentence imposed by the public prosecutor (Defendant B: imprisonment for August, two years of probation, two years of probation, community service surveillance, 160 hours, Defendant C: imprisonment for August of probation, two years of probation, observation of protection, community service, 160 hours, Defendant D: 10 months of probation, two years of probation, community service observation, 160 hours, one year of imprisonment, one year of probation, two years of probation, two years of probation, observation of protection, community service, 160 hours) is too uneasible.

Judgment

Defendant

The lower court determined as to the assertion of mistake of facts C, based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated, found the following circumstances, namely, the crime of Bosing was old since the crime of Bosing was one of the social issues, and the entire society was widely known through the media, etc., so if the Defendant, who had experience in working and working as an adult, attempted to confirm the fact that his act was related to Bosing, it would have been easily known, and the Defendant recognized that his withdrawal was an illegal act that can be subject to criminal punishment, and that there was suspicion as to whether the act of withdrawing was not the crime of Bosing. Nevertheless, the Defendant: