Among the parts against Defendant A, the remainder, excluding the rejection of a compensation order, shall be reversed.

A. The actual representative of the Defendant A, B, and D Co., Ltd. 1, K, C, Defendant B, and D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant companies”) is not the Defendant A but N. The Defendant A used the account under the N’s name or the name of the person in charge, and the Defendant A did not engage in deception or other active act, which intentionally conceals sales and makes it difficult to collect tax by intentionally omitting sales at the time of filing a tax return, thereby making it impossible or significantly difficult to collect tax, and therefore, the lower court found Defendant B, and D Co., Ltd. guilty of this part of the facts charged, on the condition that Defendant A committed the crime as above. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2) The lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant A did not throw away goods owned by the injured partyJ, and Defendant A throw away goods owned by the injured party on domestic affairs.

Even if Defendant A did not intend to damage property at the time, the lower court convicted Defendant A of this part of the facts charged. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

(c)

1) Of the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor 1 of the misunderstanding of the legal principles, since the evidence submitted by the Victim J among the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, each testimony of the witness J andY by the lower court is credibility, Defendant A could fully recognize the fact that the market price of the victim J is 3,556,700 won, and the lower court acquitted Defendant A of this part of the facts charged, and thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2) The lower court’s sentencing against the illegal Defendants is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by Defendant A and the prosecutor on the damage of Defendant A’s property.

(b) a prosecutor;