The Defendants’ appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding D did not have disclosed the details of the use of subsidies to the E Library prior to the Defendants’ accusation to the residents of the Gwangju Mine-gu apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”). Thus, the Defendants did not file a false complaint with the effect that D embezzled the above library’s subsidies.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty by misunderstanding the fact, even though it should be pronounced not guilty with respect to the false accusation on the embezzlement of library subsidies.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (Defendant A: six months of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution, 120 hours of community service order, Defendant B’s imprisonment, four months of suspended execution, one year of suspended execution, and 120 hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts is based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① the Defendants received KRW 50 million from 2012 to 2016 from the Gu Office of the Gwangju Metropolitan City to receive the subsidies of the E Library established in the apartment complex of this case from the Gu Office of the Gwangju Metropolitan City, and did not disclose the details of use, etc., and even though the Defendants demanded D to return the above subsidies, they refused to return the above subsidies. However, D submitted a written accusation to the effect that D had committed embezzlement or breach of trust with respect to the above subsidies; ② However, D submitted a settlement report on the settlement of project costs to the Gu Office of the Gwangju Metropolitan City of the Seoul Metropolitan City during the above period; ③ D had a duty to report the details of the subsidies to E by the apartment residents of this case.

There is no ground to see, 4. G of the apartment management of this case notified the E library of the details of the additional management expenses every month in the lower court.

The statement (the court below.).