All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) that there is no consistency in the statements of the Defendants, the statements among the Defendants are contradictory to each other, and the result of the call between the Defendants B and C, it is recognized that Defendant B and C have completed a false marriage report without the substance of marriage, and that Defendant A, while being aware of such circumstances, intended to introduce the two parties to receive compensation.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Defendant B, a new citizen of the facts charged of the instant case, and Defendant C, a shipbuilding China, was an agent of Defendant A, a new citizen of the Republic of Korea in early 2009, and Defendant C paid KRW 5 million to Defendant B for the purpose of acquiring the nationality of the Republic of Korea through disguised marriage and legally staying there is no genuine intention of marriage.

In addition, Defendant A received KRW 300,00 from Defendant B in return for introducing Defendant B and Defendant C, and introduced Defendant B and Defendant C, etc., and the Defendants were willing to make a false marriage report between Defendant B and Defendant C.

Accordingly, on March 5, 2009, Defendant B and Defendant C prepared a marriage report as if Defendant B and Defendant C were actually married in the family register of the Gangnam-gu civil service center of the Gangnam-gu civil service office located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, and had the public official in charge of such circumstance submit the above marriage report along with related documents, such as the marriage report in the name of the Chinese government, and had the public official in charge record the marriage of Defendant B and Defendant C in the family register file of Defendant B.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to make a false report to the public official and made the same public electronic record as the family register to be entered, and exercised by allowing the public official to keep it at a place around that time.

B. The lower court’s judgment is based on the facts charged.