The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.

Defendant

B.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of the legal principle is dependent on the establishment of a principal offender, and the illegality of an accomplice is dependent on the illegality of the principal offender in its grounds and degree. Thus, in cases where the act of the principal offender exceeds the awareness of the principal offender, the principal offender shall be held liable only to the extent that the act of the principal offender is consistent with his/her intent and shall not be held liable for any excess portion.

In this case, the defendant A believed that L is to be installed only at the gas station operated by himself, and developed the alteration program of the gas flow of this case to L, and even though L was actually aware that it was installed at a gas station, it was not known or predicted that it was installed in other gas stations, and L was shotly installed at other gas stations, and the contact with L was cut down after L was shotd to be installed at other gas stations.

Therefore, Defendant A’s liability, who is an aiding and abetting offender, should be limited to the crime of installing an alteration program of the flow of the instant case in the International Oil station, and the crime concerning another gas station that occurred thereafter exceeds the intent of Defendant A, and thus, the responsibility cannot be recognized.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the liability of aiding and abetting the Defendant A’s crime of aiding and abetting the entire crime of this case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment and five million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles requested L to establish an alteration program of gas flow to an I gas station as an actual operator of the I gas station, which was so requested by L L to Defendant A on May 15, 2013. The instant alteration program of water flow of this case, which was developed by L to Defendant A, was described on around May 15, 2013, which was conducted by M by manipulating the measuring instruments while independently operating the gas station, and invested capital in the I gas station.