Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the guilty part against Defendant H and the judgment of the court of second instance against Defendant A are all satisfied.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor (not guilty part) by the Prosecutor, Defendant H knew that he would supply fake petroleum products (not guilty part) as raw materials (not guilty of the Defendant H) and did so even with the knowledge of the fact that Defendant H would supply fake petroleum products (at least

A) The facts that fake petroleum products were supplied to CS et al. as a substantial person in charge of the CP and Q are sufficiently recognized. The first instance court erred in the misapprehension of the facts charged. 2) The first instance court’s acquittal of this part of the facts charged is unfair on the ground that the imprisonment of 10 months, 5 or 8 of the daily list of crimes (1) as shown in the first instance judgment, 10 months, 1 year and 3 of the first instance judgment, 1 year and 2 of the first instance judgment, 1 year and 2 of the first instance judgment, 3 of the crime as stated in the first instance judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the first instance court on Defendant H (unfair form of punishment) is too unreasonable.

C. The punishment sentenced by each court below (the first instance court's imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months, and the second instance court's fine for 2 million won) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

E1) misunderstanding of facts (the part where the Defendant manufactured and sold pseudo petroleum products in A factory) is limited to investors who invested in AA factory with money from AD and AE, and the actual operation of A factory is limited to BI, and the Defendant was only distributed profits as an investor and did not have been involved in the manufacture and sale of pseudo petroleum products. The first instance court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged against the Defendant is erroneous. 2) The sentence (the imprisonment of three years and six months, confiscation, and additional collection) sentenced by the first instance court of unfair sentencing (the imprisonment of three years and six months, confiscation, and additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. The facts charged regarding the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts (the part not guilty among the judgment of the court of first instance) are as follows: for the purpose of allowing the defendant to manufacture and use fake products while working as the general team leader of the CP and C Q Q Co., Ltd.