The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact misunderstanding 1) With respect to the facts constituting the crime 1 as indicated in the judgment below, L (victim E and F) with the victim E and F was licensed to install solar power plants, i.e., solar power generation business, on the roof of the mooring yard located in the former Northern-gun D.

At that time, many business operators were unable to operate solar power generation business together with the same business site (in other words, the place of power plant installation) in the north area.

The Defendant, without knowledge of this point, filed an application for permission with the roof of the training place, and with the victim E, etc. for the business. However, the Defendant failed to obtain permission due to the above criteria for permission.

Accordingly, on November 10, 2014, the Defendant applied for permission to the effect that the capacity of the electric generation business permitted in the name of L from 9kW to 200kW. However, around that time, the Defendant did not obtain the permission on the wind that the connective capacity by the power plant and branch office of the Korea Electric Power Corporation and its branch office is so small that it can be linked with each power plant.

However, the defendant accurately indicates that the defendant is a party to a contract for the establishment of a corporation C (hereinafter referred to as "C") operated by the defendant, or is below convenience.

At the time of entering into this solar power plant installation contract with victims E, etc., the above linkable capacity was increased, and according to the statement by K (the staff of the Korea Electric Power Corporation's net branch office) it was possible to obtain the above electricity generation business license until October 2014 at the latest.

In other words, the defendant could obtain sufficient permission, but the time was required for re-application due to the criteria for permission in the former North Korea area, and eventually, the defendant could not obtain permission due to the difference.

As a matter of course, the defendant thought that he would obtain a license for the electricity generation business such as victim E, etc., he would have proceeded with the installation works on the roof of the above mass

If the defendant was to obtain money, he/she shall receive money from the victims.