(b) Violation of the Certified Public Accountant Act;

2. (a) B

3.(a)(b) C

4. (a) Ansan Accounting Corporation.

5. (a)(b) D

Attorney G and H (for Defendant B)

Attorney I, J (for Defendant C)

Attorney K, L, M, and N (for Defendant Agin Accounting Corporation),

Law Firm (LLC) (For Defendant D)

Attorney P, Q, R, S, T, U, V

1. Part of the Defendants’ violation of the Act on External Audit of Stock Companies due to false entries in the audit report (hereinafter “ External Audit Act”).

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, it is justifiable for the lower court to have found the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on External Audit due to false entries in the audit report. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the specification of the facts charged, the intention to make false entries in the audit report, the establishment of joint principal offenders, and the liability of the

2. Part concerning Defendant D’s violation of the Certified Public Accountant Act due to concealment of the existence of subsequent cases in the fiscal year 2014

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, it is justifiable for the lower court to have found the Defendant guilty of charges regarding the violation of the Certified Public Accountant Act due to concealment of the existence of subsequent cases in the fiscal year 2014. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding Article 15(3) of the former Certified Public Accountant Act (amended by Act No. 13444, Jul. 24, 2015; hereinafter

3. The part concerning Defendant D’s violation of the External Audit Act due to the alteration of audit records for the fiscal year of 2014

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, it is justifiable for the lower court to have found the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on External Audit due to the alteration of audit records for the fiscal year 2014. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “an alteration” under Article 14-2(3) of the External Audit Act (wholly amended by Act No. 15022, Oct. 31, 2017) or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence

4. Part concerning the violation of the Certified Public Accountant Act due to false reports on a semiannual review report for 2015 fiscal year by Defendant B or D

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, it is justifiable for the lower court to have found the Defendant guilty of violating the Certified Public Accountant Act by falsely reporting a half-year review report in 2015. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the establishment of joint principal offenders, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules

5. Conclusion

All appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Jae-tae

Justices Kim Jae-in

Justices Min You-sook, Justice Min You-sook