A. The public officials, etc. in charge of misunderstanding the facts and legal principles E, the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, and the K (hereinafter “instant agency awarding the contract”) had sufficient knowledge and experience in building stones, who received and used blasting stones supplied by D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) without objection, and did not incur any defect as a result of the construction work. Thus, the Defendant deceiving the victims.

There is no relation between the defendant's deception and the victim's disposal act.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment, and three years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on evidence duly adopted and investigated, namely, ① processing building stones with machinery, etc. in compliance with the specifications is light stone and not processed, and blasting in the construction site, etc., are blasting stone, and the quality of the stone and blasting stone is different, and the blasting stone is less than 1/3 of that value, and the blasting stone was operated by the defendant. ②

D) Although entering into a contract with the content that the instant order is to supply lighting stone, it was supplied with blasting stone, and ③ if the instant orderer knew that the stone supplied from D is a blasting stone, it would have refused to supply it, requested to supply it, or reduced the contract price, etc. (in fact, E would have requested the supply of the stone supplied from D to lighting stone, knowing that the supplied stone is a blasting stone). ④ Although K’s on-site supervisor knew that the supplied stone received from D is a blasting stone, he did not raise any objection (Evidence record).