Of the guilty portion of the judgment of the court below, Article 1-1(a), (b), and (6) of the judgment of the court below are as follows.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles regarding the EL-related breach of trust loan (Defendant F) is to lend additional KRW 40 billion from the Hyundai Switzerland Savings Bank, and Defendant F is to obtain a request from the above bank to make a loan to EL-based corporation EL (hereinafter “EL-based corporation”) which is an executor of the EK apartment construction business in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, and it is recognized that AG-affiliated Savings Bank has been granted a loan without sufficiently examining the degree of progress and success of the above project, possibility of success, business performance capabilities, etc.

B) The portion of credit extension (1) extended to AM Co., Ltd. (BU, BW) (Defendant E, G) AM Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AM”).

) The relevant loans are determined by the management coordination office under the direct control of Defendant A and directed each bank to determine the total amount of loans and the amount of loans by each bank. Defendant A and the representative directors of each four savings bank, in advance, shall hold sufficient consultation on the amount of loans by each bank, and shall carry out the loans in an organic manner. Accordingly, AD Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AD Bank”).

Defendant E, the representative director, Defendant E’s AB Bank Corporation (hereinafter “AB Bank”).

(AC Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “AC Bank”) and

(2) The EP Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “EP”) for the EP Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant AP”) is deemed to have functional control over the functional control over the loan implementation of the AB bank and the functional control over the loan implementation of the AP bank.

(C) The portion of the lower judgment’s violation of the obligation to approve the acquisition of shares (Defendant A) (hereinafter “Defendant A”) and FD (hereinafter “FD”) in consideration of the status of the AD Bank, a major shareholder of the Z Bank, and the status of a specially related person, even if the loan belongs to the Defendant A, is a loan belonging to the AD Bank.