The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Legal principles are that the Defendant’s advantage by committing the instant fraud is the status of successful bidder and is entitled to conclude a construction contract as the status of a successful bidder, and even if such benefit is deemed as property gain, that is, the actual profit value ought to be deemed as the actual profit derived from each of the instant construction works.

Nevertheless, the court below acknowledged the crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) by deeming the construction price itself as the property or property profit acquired by the crime of fraud in this case. Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the amount of fraud, thereby affecting

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (three years of imprisonment, four years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misapprehension of legal principles

A. The summary of the facts charged in this part of the facts charged in this case is the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (hereinafter “Special Economic Crimes Act”).

The summary of the violation (based on fraud) is that the Defendant and his accomplice (hereinafter “Defendant et al.”) identified the lower limit of each official bid price in the judgment of the lower court by using the malicious program for computer use of the finance commissioner as indicated in the judgment of the lower court and the program for computer use of the bidder’s computer, and notified the specific bidders of the bid price possible for winning the bid based on this fact, and let the finance officer such as local governments, etc. select the specific bidders as successful bidders of each construction project and receive money from the ordering office at that time.

B. The judgment of the court below is based on the amount of construction cost paid by bidders according to each construction contract as stated in the judgment below, considering that the amount of construction cost of each construction project as stated in the judgment below is the amount of benefit as stipulated in the law of special consideration.