All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the contents and purport of each testimony made by the Defendants (guilty part) are that the E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) did not provide free of charge with the same contents as free of charge of cold and hot water supply based on the quantities generally implemented in the industry. Thus, the Defendants cannot be deemed to have made a false statement contrary to memory.

2) It was not confirmed whether Defendant A received the supply unit price of less than KRW 1,000 or the first half of KRW 1,000 from the H from Defendant A with respect to Defendant A. Although the above Defendant directly sought the supply unit price from H, he testified as if he directly received the above supply unit price from H. Thus, even if it is probable that H was distributed in the astronomical area, perjury is established since Defendant A made a false statement contrary to memory.

B) Defendant B did not have an exchange of the document in facsimile with the document in which the unit price of supply was written between J and J, and Defendant B did not have any possibility of having any error in his memory or any error in the content of the document was found, and even if there were errors in memory, Defendant B made a false statement contrary to his memory and thus, perjury is established.

B. The Prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing (a fine of KRW 1.5 million) sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants is deemed to be too uneasible.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged in accordance with the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court and the first instance court, determination of the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles is 1). As such, the Defendants made a false statement contrary to their memory is sufficiently recognized.