A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles and misunderstanding of the fact that the Defendants did not pay the price for the goods to the victims, were supplied to the retail business entity of the mountain uniform that was supplied by the injured party, but the group uniforms were not sold due to the economic depression caused by the depression of the sinking incident occurred on April 16, 2014, and the above transaction party did not pay the price for the goods, and there was no intention to commit the crime of defraudation against the victim at the time of concluding the clothing supply contract (hereinafter “the instant clothing supply contract”) as stated in the judgment of the court below.

2) The instant clothing supply contract was concluded with the Defendant E Co., Ltd. (E) (hereinafter “E”), not with the Defendants, and there is no legal basis to impose criminal liability on the Defendants who are individuals.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendants (10 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, 10 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

A) On September 21, 2009, Defendant C invested KRW 200,000,000 to operate X, which is a telegraph of the clothing-seller E (Evidence No. 355 of the evidence record), and Defendant B invested KRW 100,000 at the time and served as the director and auditor of the said company. Defendant A from around 2011 to Defendant A worked as the chief in charge of the business (Evidence No. 61,96, 219, 221 of the evidence record) and the creditors of E filed a lawsuit seeking the payment of goods, etc. against E or Defendant C as indicated below (Evidence No. 262 to 274 of the evidence record). The creditors’ case number name (litigation) as of November 14, 2012.