The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the reasons for appeal by the prosecutor: The defendant, an executive officer of the misunderstanding company, sold shares of up to 30% of the total number of issued shares, but only the representative director D was aware of his/her old shares

It is difficult to understand the assertion.

The defendant has sufficient motive for public offering by obtaining 30% or more of the price for the sale of shares.

Although D, who is an accomplice, has reversed his statement, credibility is recognized in D's previous statement, such as consistently stating that the defendant was aware of each circumstance.

In addition, in full view of the status, career, etc. of the defendant, it is recognized that the defendant acquired approximately KRW 8.2 billion by fraud in collusion with D while recognizing that the shares of this case are false.

Judgment

As the premise of the legal doctrine, the joint principal offender under Article 30 of the Criminal Act commits a crime jointly with two or more persons. In order for a joint principal offender to be established, it is necessary to have committed a crime through functional control based on a joint doctor as a subjective element and objective requirement. A joint principal offender’s intent is to jointly engage in a specific criminal act with a specific intent and to transfer his/her own intent by using another person’s act (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do15470, Jan. 12, 2017). It is required to prove that a joint principal offender constitutes a crime of conspiracy or conspiracy in a joint principal offender, and it is required to establish such intent.

In a case where the defendant recognizes facts directly involved in the act of execution but denies the criminal intent, the facts constituting such subjective elements are bound to be proved by the method of proving indirect facts that have considerable relevance with the criminal intent due to the nature of the things, and what constitutes considerable relevance indirect facts are based on normal empirical rule.