A. Defendant A1) M&A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “R”) with respect to the second crime of mistake of facts in the original judgment

(2) The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the sentencing of the court below (1 year and 10 months, and 4 months, as to the crime No. 2 of the judgment of the court below as to the crime No. 1) even if the sentencing of the court below is not so unfair sentencing, since the actual management of AA, not the defendant, is not the defendant, and the defendant is not liable for the payment of the goods, and even if the defendant is responsible for the payment of the goods, it is merely a failure to pay the price to the victim due to the aggravation of the

B. The judgment of the court below that pronounced Defendant B guilty was erroneous by misunderstanding the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and even if not, the sentence of the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, AA, which has been in charge of distribution business in R, stated in the investigative agency and the court of the court below that “the actual operation of R was the defendant, the final decision to be supplied by the victim T, and the execution of R was made under the settlement of the defendant,” ② the victim stated to the effect that “the defendant was aware of the president of R, the defendant was to immediately pay the price, the delivery was ordered, and the defendant was urged to pay the price after delivery,” ③ there was a fact that the defendant agreed to pay the price for the goods to the victim, and that the defendant was not able to pay the price for the goods.”