[Defendant A] The part of the judgment of conviction (including the part of innocence) shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence of the lower court against the above Defendants A, B, C, D, E, F, H, and J [Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for five years and fines for three billion won and KRW 3.4 billion, Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”), and in the case of a corporation, the name of “stock company” is omitted.

(C) a fine: 3.7 billion won, C (hereinafter referred to as “C”).

() Fine of 30 million won: Imprisonment of 3 years and fine of 1.90 million won; imprisonment of 3 years and fine of 1.90 million won; imprisonment of 2 years; imprisonment of 3 years; imprisonment of 3 years; imprisonment of 1 year; Defendant H; imprisonment of 1 year; and Defendant J of 1 year; imprisonment of 1 year) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant 1 did not receive money from A, and even if the Defendant received money, the lower court found Defendant 1 guilty of this part of the facts charged without any consideration and business relationship in light of the Defendant’s duties in charge, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles. 2) The lower court’s punishment (one month of imprisonment and six million won of fine) against the Defendant of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

C. Prosecutor 1) The violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) (Embezzlement 8,12,13, 19, and 22 of the attached Table of Crimes (No. 1,842,17,582), part of the 26th (291,36,300) against Defendant A, D, and part of the 8,12,13, and 19 of the attached Table of Crimes (4), and part of the 6th (1,842,17,582 won) against Defendant A with respect to illegal waterway funds in 2006 through 2011. The part against Defendant D is part of the 1,842,17,582 won) of the attached Table of Crimes (7).

[] The facts charged in this part of the facts charged are recognized based on the use of the “expenses for cash enforcement” for the preparation of each statement and accounting staff BR at the investigation agency of Defendant A, D, and E. In the case of the instant cash enforcement entertainment expenses, due to its nature, the above Defendants’ entertainment expenses (the moment the said Defendants paid cash) as funds for the purpose of illegal street funding reaches the acceptance of embezzlement.