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

Defendant

B. The appeal by the defendant A and the prosecutor shall be dismissed, respectively.

A. Defendant A(1) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- -- -- -- --- --- ----- ----- ---- ---- ----- ------ ------

B. Defendant B (1) Inasmuch as the Defendant received KRW 65 million from D, Defendant B’s misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant’s store leased D (hereinafter “instant store”).

2) The sentence imposed by the lower court of unfair sentencing (one month of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) on the Defendant is too unlimited and unfair. The sentence imposed by the lower court of unfair sentencing (one month of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

C. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below on the Defendants is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged based on the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the defendant A's assertion of mistake of facts, namely, ① the agreement prepared by the defendant with D does not contain the date of preparation, but the project district and the contents of removal work, including the reconstruction project in the E zone (hereinafter "the project in this case"), are specified as the contracting party, and the defendant as the representative director of the above company was the joint guarantor, and the (ju) Z and the defendant's seal are affixed, and there are documents, such as business registration, corporate seal impression, the certificate of personal seal impression, the defendant's personal seal impression, and drawings, and ② the contract and attached documents are affixed between the parties, ② the horizontal number of removal work in the agreement was modified from E zone 80,00 to 80,000 square meters (if the use was shown to the wife of the defendant's claim, it is not necessary to correct the number of copies).