2. The sentence against Defendant B shall be suspended;

3...

A. The Defendants (1) misunderstanding of facts (1) - Defendant A reported that the police attempted to go beyond the cost of female demonstration by pushing ahead of a brush demonstration, and there is a fact that the police failure was inflicted on E in order to prevent it, but there is no fact that the injury was inflicted on E as shown in the decision of the court below.

② Defendant B, while Defendant B had a son wear by contingently deducted the son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A: a fine of 5 million won, Defendant B: a fine of 3 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below on the defendants is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below are consistent with the purport that the Defendant A, a one-time police officer of the Gyeongnam Provincial Police Agency, committed an act of keeping the Defendant A’s satisfe with the police officer’s satisfe with the Defendant A’s satfe with his satfe with his satfe with his satfe with his satfe with his satfe with his satfe with his satfe with his satfe with his satfe with his satfe with his satfe with the Defendant’s satfe with his satfe with his satfe with the Defendant’s satfe at the time of the satfe with the Defendant’s satfewfe with the Defendant’s satfe at the same time of the instant crime (Evidence 21).

(2) The following are acknowledged by the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court.