[Defendant A, C, and D] Defendant A, C, and D’s appeal and prosecutor’s appeal against the above Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants 1) accused the victims of the mistake of facts regarding the illegal accusation is that the victims had followed clear procedures in determining additional charges borne by the members of the reconstruction association of this case, whether the victims did not know about the occurrence of losses, and that there was no intention to commit a crime against the Defendants in order to clarify the case. Specifically, the Defendants alleged that the Defendants stated “no intention” in the accusation of this case was dealt with without the responsibility of the general meeting of management and disposition, but did not contain accurate contents as to the distribution of additional charges to the responsible members of the management and disposition general meeting, and that they did not cause damage to the members by adding additional charges of KRW 18.1 billion or KRW 19.1 billion to the members of the reconstruction association of this case. ③ The Defendants did not understand that the Defendants did not intend to commit a crime against the public interest because they did not cause damage to the public interest of the victim.

3) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment for Defendant A, ten months of imprisonment for Defendant B, Defendant C, and D: 6 months of suspended sentence, two years of suspended sentence for each of the six months of imprisonment, and 120 hours of community service, too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The criminal intent is a conclusive intentional act in determining a mistake of facts with respect to a false accusation.