[Defendant A] The part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A (including the part not guilty in the grounds) shall be reversed.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) 1’s mistake of facts as to occupational breach of trust or misapprehension of legal principles, and the Defendant did not recognize that each of the instant negotiated contracts was concluded in violation of his duties, thereby causing or causing damage to D. In addition, since each of the instant negotiated contracts was concluded at an appropriate price as a result, it cannot be said that not only caused property damage to D, but also the risk of causing damage. (2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing to Defendant A (three years of suspended execution in one year and six months), which the lower court sentenced to Defendant A, is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (unfair punishment)’s punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant B (one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor, three years of suspended execution, and 120 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

C. Each sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants is too uneased and unfair.

2. Judgment on the misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by Defendant A

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant, as the D Training Chief, has duties to purchase R at an appropriate price compared with various companies that produce and sell R among the E products to be provided to developing countries, while engaging in the projects for supporting goods in developing countries in D (hereinafter “instant projects”), the Defendant instructed the principal of the Yeonsu-gu Department L in charge of the R purchasing practice to the effect that “T enters into a purchase contract with T&R on October 2014, 2014, where L is an intermediate distributor who is a domestic distribution company that supplies and sells R from S Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “S”).