The judgment below

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

Defendant

C. Judgment on Defendant C is not guilty.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (unfair punishment)’s sentence (one year of imprisonment with prison labor, two years of suspended execution, one hundred and twenty hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles did not know the fact that Defendant B and A (a principal offender) provided entertainment to union members and that there was such a practice until settlement is made after receiving a claim for service payment from Defendant C (1) , which was the principal offender, and thus, there was no implied or approved that the Defendant would pay public relations expenses related to entertainment.

Therefore, the above defendant did not have the awareness that the principal offender's act constitutes an act that constitutes a constituent element, that is, the intention of a principal offender and aiding and abetting the principal offender's practice, that is, there was no intention of aiding and abetting.

Nevertheless, the court below found guilty of the facts charged in the violation of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the intention as a requisite for establishment of an aiding

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s unreasonable sentencing (two years of suspended execution for six months of imprisonment, and eight hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. As to the Defendant’s assertion, even if considering the following facts: (a) the Defendant led to the confession and reflect of the instant crime; and (b) there was no history of punishment for the same kind of crime, the instant crime was committed upon delegation of publicity duties related to the selection of redevelopment project contractor by the said Defendant, and thus infringing upon the procedural fairness and transparency of the redevelopment project by providing money and valuables and entertainment to its members while performing his duties; and (c) it cannot be deemed that the amount of money and valuables and entertainment provided is small; and (d) the above Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc.