A. As alleged in the case of paragraphs 2. to 3. of mistake of facts

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (the defendant: a fine of KRW 10 million for each of the defendants) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles by Defendant C

A. (i) Defendant C did not receive money from B as stated in the lower judgment.

B’s statement on August 31, 2006 and September 25, 2006 on the time when Defendant C paid money to Defendant C does not coincide with the objective situation at the time of the company’s situation, and ② Defendant C was in charge of the mobile device leader as the head of the J, but Defendant C was merely the head of the enforcement department and was not in a position to exercise influence over the determination of the unit price of the supply department. ③ At the time of request by Defendant C to conclude other contracts under a private contract, Defendant C had a bad appraisal of Defendant C, and thus, Defendant C had a motive to gather, and thus, Defendant C could not be found guilty on the sole basis of the contents of the book.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted and examined by the lower court in the part on the “determination of the Defendant C and his defense counsel’s assertion” in the lower court’s judgment, Defendant C also asserted as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court’s judgment with regard to this, it is so decided as per the judgment of the lower court.