Among them, the part on collection of additional collection against Defendant A and the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B. Imprisonment.

A. Defendant A (1) In collusion with Defendant A (1) (the part on fraud), the Defendant did not have acquired money by deceiving L in collusion with the court and the public prosecutor’s office, although he did not intend to make or arrange a solicitation, and instead, he could make a solicitation or arrangement to the court and the public prosecutor’s office through B.

The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the charge of fraud among the facts charged against the defendant was erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The Defendant, from November 15, 2014 to September 3, 2016, paid the amount of money received from L to September 3, 2016, and transferred the total of KRW 278,250,000 to B’s account. At least the above KRW 278,250,000 to B was distributed under the pretext of solicitation or good offices by the court and prosecutor’s office, and thus, should be additionally collected from B. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the ground that the value actually received among accomplices cannot be known.

(3) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against Defendant B (two years of imprisonment, additional collection of KRW 164,300,000) is too unreasonable.

(c)

The above types of punishment that the court below decided against the Defendants are too unhued and unfair.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. (1) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the determination of the grounds for appeal against Defendant A and the Prosecutor on each of the grounds for appeal against Defendant A is examined.