A. Defendant A’s misunderstanding of the facts reveals that Defendant A received some of the money from business employees P of Pakistan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Pacific”), but there was no fact that Defendant A received a total of KRW 1,2790,000 (in particular, Defendant A did not receive money by means of franchiseing and special purchase, etc. as shown in the judgment below, Nos. 27,28 per annum of the pertinent crime list as indicated in the judgment below). (2) The sentence of the court below which was unfair in sentencing (an amount of KRW 7 million, additional collection of KRW 1,279,00) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (misunderstanding of fact) the amount which Defendant B received as a rebates from P of the Pacific Business Operators P is merely KRW 1,00,000,000 in total, around October 2013 and around March 2014.

Defendant

D. (1) Defendant D merely received KRW 10,000 won per 2 months from the wintering around 2010 to the end of 2 months before and after the end of 2014 from P, and there was no fact that Defendant D received total of KRW 1,0520,000 for 25 times as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the lower judgment.

(2) In the case of Defendant D’s misapprehension of the legal principle, the part No. 1 through No. 3 of the daily list of the pertinent crime in the judgment of the court below was completed after the lapse of five years from the date of the act.

(3) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 5 million, an additional collection of KRW 10520,000) is too unreasonable.

(d)

Defendant

E (1) In the case of Defendant E’s misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the statute of limitations has expired after the lapse of five years from the date of the act as to the part of KRW 1-2.4 million per annum of the sight of the pertinent crime.

(2) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 7 million, an additional collection of KRW 1,4170,00) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below as to the assertion that the above defendants A, B, and D facts were erroneous, the above defendants shall induce the adoption of drugs from sowing as stated in the facts constituting the crime of the court below.