A. Defendant A led Defendant B and the witness E of the lower court to the instant construction at the investigation stage. Defendant A led Defendant B and the instant construction at the investigation stage.

Since the statements made between the three parties coincide without contradiction, the credibility of the statements made at the investigation stage is high, while the statements made at the trial stage are lower than credibility because they are inconsistent with each other, the statements made at the investigation stage of the parties are lower than credibility.

In light of the facts charged against Defendant A, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence against Defendant B (hereinafter, 3,00,000 won) against Defendant B is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the assertion of mistake of facts in a criminal trial ought to be based on the prosecutor’s proof of the facts charged, and the judge ought to find the Defendant guilty with evidence of probative value sufficient to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the Defendant, it is inevitable to determine it with the benefit of the Defendant.

2) The lower court acknowledged the following circumstances based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, ① the construction of a warehouse building in the macro-si Do Forest (hereinafter “instant land”) upon the request of E, the owner of the instant land, and the construction cost was paid from E, and the construction cost was actually paid from E; ② B knew that E was the owner of the instant land from the commencement of the said construction; ③ B did not contact with the Defendant Corporation at the time of the commencement of the said construction work in the lower court’s court.