All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the Defendants guilty despite the fact-misunderstanding and the misapprehension of legal principles that the Defendants did not establish a fraud or an attempted crime, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence that the lower court sentenced the Defendants (as for Defendant A: 3.5 million won; 2 years of probation; 700,000 won of fine; 2 years of probation; 80,000 won of fine; 2 years of probation; 2.5 million won of fine; 2 years of probation; 2 years of probation; 80,000 won of fine; 2 years of probation; 80,000 won of fine; 2 years of probation; 2.5 million won of fine; 2.5 million won of fine; 2.5 million won of fine; 2.5 million won of probation; 2.5 million won of Defendant J; and 2 years of probation) are too unreasonable.

2. The lower court, based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated, found that the Defendants collected money under the name of the so-called service secret and paid it to the Z, and had the Z prepare “L fishing village fraternity production activity data” with the content that the Defendants arbitrarily calculated the individual amount of operation on the basis of the amount of compensation received from the Korea Native Atomic Energy Co., Ltd. in the past, and the Defendants were the chief of the L fishing village fraternity at the time.

In order to calculate compensation for damage to sericultural fishery by using M, etc., it seems that the individual production records, which served as the basis of the above data, were delivered to the individual production records in preparation for the actual inspection. Furthermore, the operation should be proven by diving methods without a oxygen supply device for at least 60 days annually, and the above operation should be proved by the data on sericultural fishery performance. The data submitted by the defendants for this purpose are false and false, and the defendants are also deemed to have been aware of the fact that the above performance data was falsely prepared in light of the above circumstances.

In light of the above, the Defendants are guilty.