All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) Defendants did not receive the payment from C in exchange for an unlawful solicitation that “I would be selected as an implementing company of the collection of earth and rocks in this case.” 2) Even if the money received from C was the payment for an illegal solicitation, the Defendants recognized the said money as the introduction cost, and thus, the intent of taking advantage of trust cannot be recognized.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (one year of imprisonment, one year of imprisonment, and one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to the wrongful solicitation 1) The defendants alleged the same purport as the grounds for appeal in the court below. The court below held that: (a) as the head of the field office belonging to F, Defendant A had a substantial authority to recommend a business entity to D in selecting a business entity in D at the time of 2015; (b) the defendants received money as stated in the facts charged in return for introducing C to D in return for introducing C from C to the implementing business entity of the collection of earth and stone in this case; (c) the defendants, who introduced C as the actual operator of I, through the introduction of P and the defendant B, were to recommend I to the business entity to conduct the collection of earth and stone in this case; and (d) the defendants and C, at the same time, have already been requested to make a contract for the collection of earth and stone in this case; and (e) the defendants had already been designated as the business entity to request the collection of stone in this case.