All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the Defendants’ interference with the Defendants’ respective duties by mistake of facts (as to each guilty part), the Defendants did not interfere with the Defendants’ duties by force by collecting the frame from a police officer’s entrance.

B) Regarding Defendant A and D’s violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint assault) and Defendant A’s injury, the said Defendants did not commit any assault or injury to the victims, and in particular, there is no evidence that Defendant A was exposed to the outbreak of the Victim K.

C) With respect to Defendant B’s non-existence of accusation, the instant confirmation document should be deemed forged by theO in light of the following: (a) there was a motive for the foregoing Article; (b) there was any circumstance under which T’s statement is not reliable; and (c) the form, content, etc. of the instant confirmation document is difficult to believe as an ordinary document.

Therefore, Defendant B is not free from theO, etc.

D) Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Each sentence (Defendant A: a fine of KRW 5 million; a fine of KRW 7 million; Defendant C: a fine of KRW 2 million; and Defendant D: a fine of KRW 4 million) sentenced by the lower court against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

B. In relation to the Defendants’ respective special larcenys by mistake of facts (as to the Defendants’ respective special larcenys among the acquitted portion), the Supreme Court Decision 2011Na9273 Decided Busan High Court (hereinafter “instant final and conclusive judgment”) cited as the grounds for the Defendants’ assertion merely pertains to Defendant B’s duty to collect the aggregate and to leave the H private building, and cannot be deemed as having recognized the ownership or any right to the aggregate, and the Supreme Court has determined that the aggregate to be delivered was a subordinate to H, in a lawsuit for delivery of movables between the victim foundation and L company.