The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 20,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) was not a subsidy for the act of price adjustment, which was remitted by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles, and the Defendant did not have any participation in the act of price adjustment.

The judgment of the court below that found Defendant guilty on the basis of only W/S’s partial statement is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or misconception of facts.

(2) Even if the conviction of the defendant is found to be unfair in sentencing, in light of the fact that the defendant does not enjoy criminal proceeds, the defendant committed the instant crime in the course of performing his duties as an authorized accountant, the criminal history of the defendant, and the scale of market price operations, etc., the sentence sentenced by the court below (two years of suspended sentence in August) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the fact that the prosecutor’s market price adjustment act causes serious harm to the sound development of the stock market, and that the defendant committed the above crime despite the occupation of an official accountant and did not seriously reflect the above crime, the punishment sentenced by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant had already asserted as stated in the grounds of appeal in the lower court’s judgment as to the Defendant’s misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, and the lower court rejected the above assertion on the grounds of detailed reasons in the column of “determination of defense counsel’s assertion

Examining the circumstances of the lower court’s reasoning based on the evidence duly admitted and recognized by the lower court in comparison with the records of the instant case, the lower court, at the time of the instant crime, had a functional control over the Defendant as a joint principal offender beyond allowing the Defendant to commit the instant crime, including S and W, without restraint.

The judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and the evidence additionally submitted by the defendant in the trial does not interfere with the above judgment.

. The defendant-appellant.