The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In full view of the fact-misunderstanding (not guilty part against Defendant D) Defendant D’s statement to the investigation agency, Defendant D’s registration was made under the name of his wife, Defendant D’s trust to his family members, and the part found Defendant D guilty, etc., the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby acquitted Defendant D on the part of the charges of this case, which completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of his wife twice in the name of his wife.

B. The sentencing unfair by the court below is unfair because each sentence (the fine of KRW 15 million for Defendant A and C, the fine of KRW 7 million for Defendant B, and the fine of KRW 20 million for Defendant D) declared by the court below against the Defendants is too uneasible.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the circumstances admitted by the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the lower court determined that Defendant D entered into an agreement with the Z with a view to evading tax or avoiding statutory restrictions.

It is difficult to recognize

The decision was determined.

In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the records, the court below's determination of not guilty of this part of the facts charged is just and acceptable, and there is no new evidence submitted in the trial. Thus, there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts and misunderstanding legal principles as pointed out by the prosecutor of the court below, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. In full view of the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records of the instant case’s judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing, the lower court appears to have been reasonably determined by fully considering all the circumstances, including the various reasons for sentencing alleged by the prosecutor, and no special circumstance exists to the extent that the sentence of the lower court is to be changed.

3. In conclusion, the Prosecutor’s appeal is justified.