All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) The Defendants were to be aware of the fact that the Defendants received KRW 10 million at the expense by being delegated with the overall affairs, such as normalization of management and recovery of investment funds from the victim F and G, the investors of the building of this case (hereinafter “the building of this case”) and to resolve the instant lawsuit seeking to clarify the name of the building of this case.

It shall not be acquired by deception.

The lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the lower court found the Defendants guilty of the charge of fraud.

(2) The amount of KRW 9 million received from Defendant B (with respect to the violation of the Attorney Lee Young-gu Act) was received as the service price to resolve the dispute over the possession of the factory building located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, and it is merely merely a fact that Defendant B’s request prepared the draft of the petition. The judgment of the court below convicting Defendant B of the violation of the law of defense against Defendant B is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court against the illegal Defendants (2 years of suspended sentence in June, and 3 million won in case of Defendant B) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court in determining the Defendants’ assertion of misunderstanding of facts (A) in light of the determination of the Defendants’ fraud, the lower court fully recognizes that the Defendants obtained KRW 10 million from the victims for resolution without any particular intent or ability to resolve the instant building name lawsuit.

① With respect to the circumstances in which the victims introduced the Defendants from the investigative agency to the court of the court below to deliver KRW 10 million to the Defendants, they are “the Defendants required to resolve legal disputes” and “a person who can resolve the Daegu problem.”