All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles that the lower court deemed F’s statement to F’s investigative agency as evidence under Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act was admitted as admissibility of evidence, even though there is no proof to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to “the statement made under particularly reliable circumstances” was ruled out, and therefore, there is an error of misunderstanding of legal doctrine.

The Defendants, who received the instant real estate from F, prepared a letter of delegation for issuance of certificate of seal imprint, written application for withdrawal of deposit, and written contract for gift.

F’s statement in the investigation agency of F is not reliable, and even if there is a somewhat unreasonable challenge against the Defendants, the interests of the Defendant should be determined. There is no evidence to prove the Defendants’ crime, and there is an error of mistake of facts.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 120 hours of community service order) are too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the Prosecutor by the lower court to the Defendants is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the Defendants’ misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) The court below held that F made a statement at an investigative agency; F was under the condition that F was unable to make a statement due to dementia when the testimony was summoned as a witness in this court; F’s investigative agency each statement was consistent with F’s content; and in particular, F’s statement in the protocol of investigation of the police and prosecutor’s office (Evidence No. 55, 67, 68, 69 of the evidence list) against the Defendants was made under the confrontation with the Defendants in light of the fact that the statement was made under the confrontation with the Defendants, etc., in view of the fact that F’s statement was made under a reliable circumstance or under the circumstances that could guarantee the credibility or voluntariness of each statement, it is admissible under Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act.