Defendant

All A and prosecutor appeals are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the prosecutor (1) misjudgment of facts (not guilty part) Defendant A and AH did not have a significant impact on the share price, the lower court, despite the fact that the above dispute and resolution of management rights had a significant impact on the share price, determined that the increase in the transaction day prior to the transaction day does not constitute a "profit gained from the violation" and acquitted this part of the facts charged.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) Each sentence (Defendant A: imprisonment for six months, two years of probation, two years of probation, three years of community service, 80 hours of probation, additional collection, 80 hours of social service, 1 year of probation, two years of probation, 2 years of probation, 162,281,490 won additional collection, 80 hours of community service, Defendant C: imprisonment for eight months of probation, two years of probation, 2 years of probation, 47,585, 940 won, community service, 80 hours of social service, Defendant D: imprisonment for eight months of probation, two years of probation, 2 years of collection, 42,874, 614 won, community service, 80 hours of social service, Defendant E: imprisonment for one year and six years of probation, three years of probation, three years of probation, 20 years of probation, 20, 94, 522, 80 hours of probation, 20 years of probation, 37 years of probation, 285 hours of execution,

B. The sentence imposed on Defendant A is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The summary of the charge of this case’s assertion of mistake of facts is as follows: (a) the Defendants used material nonpublic information known to the Defendants in the course of performing their duties in the sale of specific securities, etc. to obtain unjust enrichment of KRW 39,310,630 for Defendant A; (b) Defendant B, KRW 218,616,740 for Defendant C; and (c) Defendant C, KRW 59,091,90 for Defendant C; KRW 75,054,264 for Defendant D; and Defendant F, KRW 342,016,026 for Defendant A; and KRW 46,092,270 for Defendant G; and Defendant E obtained unjust enrichment of KRW 342,016,026 for Defendant E.

(2) The summary of the judgment of the court below is as follows.