The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The Defendants are not guilty. The Defendants are not guilty, and the summary of each of the above acquittal judgment is publicly announced.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding the Defendants (1) misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendants first met in Q restaurant around early September 2009, and there was no speech about the instant development permit. Therefore, there was no fact that the Defendants discussed about the instant development permit in advance at Q restaurant before delivery and conspired to receive money from K for the purpose of street funds in advance.

On November 25, 2009, the Defendants met again with K around 25, 2009, and at that time K first turned out the talk about the development of the land of this case, and Mad Co. B will find out the region and contact.

In addition, the Defendants did not make a statement to K that public officials need to receive the funds.

Therefore, the Defendants did not receive money from K for the purpose of raising funds to public officials as stated in this part of the facts charged, and Defendant B did not have the intention of deception and deception.

(B) With respect to the violation of the 2nd fraud and defense justice in the judgment of the court below, Defendant A only borrowed KRW 10,000,000 from K for the purpose of lending it to his/her birth and to his/her branch on April 2010, and Defendant A only borrowed from K for the purpose of lending it to his/her birth and to his/her branch on the date specified in this part of the facts charged.

The phrase " shall not be a fact that he/she has received KRW 10 million in the name of a public official by deceiving K, such as horses, and has not received KRW 10 million in the name of a public official.

(2) Each sentence (Defendant A: 1 year of imprisonment with prison labor, 2 years of suspended sentence, 10 months of suspended sentence, 2 years of suspended sentence, 2 years of suspended execution, 2 years of collected collection) sentenced by the court below against the Defendants are too unreasonable.

B. Each sentence sentenced by the prosecutor by the court below against the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination as to the Defendants’ misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. Summary of the facts charged in the instant case (1) the Defendants are the defendants.