The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed.

The Defendants are not guilty. The Defendants are not guilty.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (Misunderstanding and misunderstanding of legal principles) 1) Defendant D, Co-Defendant B, and C (hereinafter the above third party) related to the lending of certified public appraiser qualification.

(2) As an employee of the K appraiser’s office operated by the Defendant, he was in charge of preparing a field survey and a written appraisal report in the appraisal of corporeal movables, and received a certain rate of piece rates from among the appraisal fees without any basic level. However, the Defendant conducted the appraisal of corporeal movables by reviewing and approving the aforementioned written appraisal report and the written appraisal report prepared on the basis thereof. In particular, the Defendant directly conducted the appraisal of corporeal movables (such as non-listed stocks, special machinery, patent rights, etc.), which can be deemed as a special object among the appraisal of corporeal movables. As long as the Defendant exclusively conducted the appraisal of real estate, which is the main business of the said appraisal office, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have leased the appraiser’s license to Defendant D, etc., and the lower court determined that the Defendant lent the appraiser’s license to Defendant D, etc., but the lending of the qualification certificate itself cannot be deemed as a concurrent act for a single period of time, and even if it is deemed that the Defendant lent the qualification certificate to many people, it cannot be deemed as a single act.

3. "Partial statement of the witness R" presented by the court below in relation to the burden of proof in a criminal trial is the method of evidence submitted by the defendant's side, and the burden of proof in a criminal trial is the prosecutor.