All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal (misunderstanding of facts) ① J and K have filed the instant complaint against Defendant A on suspicion of occupational breach of trust, etc.

Even if it is only considered in the contents of the complaint, and the F’s employees are aware of the order of the instant construction work and the allocation of work among the Defendants as a person who actually managed the instant construction work and the steel reinforced concrete construction work, and K employed by F is entitled to specifically state whether the instant construction work is implemented or not. As such, the J and K’s statement is credibility; ② the construction of steel reinforced concrete by a construction company without a license for steel reinforced concrete construction work is not leased merely because the owner of the instant construction work engages in the construction work, the construction work is in violation of the legislative purpose of the Framework Act on Construction without a license for construction work under the legal responsibility of the constructor; ③ the testimony that Defendant B was employed by the F and the construction of the instant steel works is identical with the instant reinforced concrete construction work, and the lower court, even if Defendant B participated in part of the instant construction work, ordered the Defendants to be acquitted of the instant specific construction work under the name of the Framework Act on Construction, which is not directly related to the supply of and demand for the instant construction work.

2. The lower court determined that the instant facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, acquitted.

(a) Appropriate execution of construction works of the relevant legal doctrine and the construction industry.