All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the Defendant’s grounds of appeal, “the purpose of inducing a trade transaction” as stipulated in Article 176(2) of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act is to attract investors to trade securities by misunderstanding that the market price was formed by the natural demand and supply rules in the securities market, despite artificially manipulating the market price, and thus inducing investors to trade securities. However, it is not a matter of whether the market price exists for other purposes or its purpose is the main purpose, but it is sufficient that the degree of perception of the purpose is not even true.

In addition, the term "trades that misleads anyone to believe that the trading of the securities or exchange-traded derivatives is booming, or cause a fluctuation in the market price" under subparagraph 1 of the same Article refers to the trade that is likely to cause an artificial change in the market price and trading volume to be formed in the free competition market due to normal supply and demand due to other factors not attributable to the market cause. Accordingly, it is not necessary until the market price is actually changed, and if a series of acts are involved, it is sufficient that the overall act will cause a change in the market price.

Whether it falls under any of the above requirements may be determined by comprehensively taking into account such indirect facts as the nature of the securities and the total number of outstanding securities, the price and trading volume trend, the transaction situation before and after, and after, the transaction situation, the economic rationality and fairness of the transaction, the possibility of disguised or false transaction, the degree of market intervention, the continuous management of the closing price, etc.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do7471, Nov. 29, 2007). The lower court, based on its adopted evidence, acknowledged facts as indicated in its reasoning, and the Defendant artificially e.g., F’s share price through members of securities broadcasting.