All appeals filed by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

As seen next to the misunderstanding of the prosecutor’s fact-finding and the misunderstanding of the legal principles, the judgment of not guilty among the judgment of the court below is erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Defendant

A and B participated in the operation of DF gas stations, DG gas stations, and DH gas stations even after the settlement agreement was reached on September 4, 2009 with AM, thereby operating the aforementioned gas stations as a organization of SP (related to paragraph 1 of the acquittal part in the judgment below). Defendant B instructed the following officers of the next vessel to use the victim AAC to engage in special injury and activities of a criminal organization through such order (related to paragraph 2 of the acquittal part in the judgment below). The punishment that the lower court sentenced the Defendants to the punishment unfair by sentencing (limited to Defendant A: 10 years of imprisonment; Defendant C: 4 years of imprisonment; Defendant B: Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor) is too unreasonable.

In relation to the Defendants’ mistake and misapprehension of the legal principles as to the joining and activities of Defendant A’s criminal organization, Defendant A only operated a gas station business that sells similar petroleum products to AM, etc., which is a staff member of SP, and Defendant A did not join SP as an executive member or thereafter have been engaged in activities as an organization of a criminal organization (related to paragraphs 1 and 2-A of the Criminal facts in the judgment below). In relation to the special injury to AM, Defendant A did not have committed any injury by citing AM as each item (related to Article 2-b(b) of the criminal facts in the judgment below). In relation to the preparation for murder against AM, Defendant A did not have committed any injury by citing AM as an item (related to Article 2-B(b) of the Criminal facts in the judgment below). In relation to the preparation for murder against AM, Defendant A did not have committed any injury to B Z, introduced B B Z at

On the other hand, only the BZ, which is a major quality of BW and is administered with cancer, has been able to receive medical treatment (Article 2-3 of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below).

As to the issue of interference with the operation of gas stations, taking advantage of the power of operation, intimidation, and business interference, Defendant A sells similar petroleum products jointly with AM.