All appeals filed by A, B, C, D, and E and prosecutor's appeals filed against the Defendants are dismissed.

A. Defendant B 1) In misunderstanding of the legal principles, Defendant B’s company participating in the instant tendering procedure is only five enterprises includingO and Q, which is more than the number of all enterprises participating in the tendering procedure. The Defendant did not commit any act such as collusion with other bidders than the above five enterprises. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant committed any act such as collusion with other bidders, etc., and thus, it did not cause an unfair influence on the reasonable price formation through fair competition, thereby impairing the fairness of the tendering procedure. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of suspended sentence for imprisonment for up to eight months) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendants A, C, D, and E’s respective sentences (two years of suspended sentence in one year of imprisonment; two years of suspended sentence in eight months of suspended sentence; two years of suspended sentence in two years of imprisonment; two years of suspended sentence in six months of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment) are too unreasonable.

C. The above sentence of the lower court against Defendant A, B, C, D, and E and the sentence of the lower court against Defendant F (two years of suspended sentence for six months of imprisonment) are too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The crime of interference with the judgment of the lower court regarding Defendant B’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine does not require the actual appearance of the outcome as a dangerous crime established in the event of undermining the fairness of bidding by deceptive means, threat of force, or other means. Here, “act detrimental to the fairness of bidding” refers to the act of causing a situation where there is a possibility of obstructing fair competition, that is, the act of causing an unreasonable impact on the formation of reasonable price through fair competition, and includes not only the act of impairing the fairness of bidding, but also the act of impairing the fair competition

In addition, collusion between bidding participants does not necessarily require collusion with all bidding participants in order to cause interference with bidding, and it is also a case where collusion has been conducted only with some bidding participants.