All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s ground for appeal is that: (a) the Defendant’s mistake of facts as to the actual trading price manipulation (i) was prosecuted through the so-called “short-term market price manipulation through the so-called “short-term market price manipulation” in which the Defendant continues to repeat high-priced purchasing and selling orders; and (b) the part which does not constitute a short-term market price manipulation among the Defendant’s trading does not constitute a market price manipulation.

In addition, in the case of a simple high-priced purchase which does not involve the largest trading among the stock trading transactions conducted by the defendant, there is no distortion of trading volume, and it is not an order for the purchase at the market price or an order for the purchase at the price higher than the immediately preceding or relative trading price. Therefore, it does not constitute a manipulation of market price.

Although the defendant simply selected and traded a category where trading volume is high and the share price increases, the judgment of the court of first instance that the defendant's series of trading acts constitutes a manipulation act conducted for the purpose of inducing trading, etc. is erroneous in the misconception of facts as to the manipulation act by actual trading, etc.

The first instance sentence on the accused of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The Defendant, based on the mistake of facts regarding the securities account used in the manipulation of market prices, made use of the AM securities account in the name of another person F while selling and buying real estate due to the manipulation of market prices.

Nevertheless, there is an error of misunderstanding the facts in the first instance judgment that the F’s securities account does not constitute the securities account used for the Defendant’s manipulation.

It is normal in addition to the increase in the share price due to the violation of the law on unjust enrichment, which was gained by the manipulation, or the increase in the share price of the company concerned during the period of mistake of facts.