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 of the crime of interference with bidding, although the Defendants did not interfere with bidding, is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Each sentence of the lower court on the Defendants of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of one million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances that can be recognized by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendants can sufficiently be recognized as impeding the fairness of the tender.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendants' above assertion of mistake of facts.

1) According to each evidence of the court below's holding, E apartment (hereinafter "the apartment of this case") shall be established in Sisti-si.

On June 11, 2012, the chairperson of the tenant representative council announced that the company should be selected by bidding methods among the participating companies with certain qualifications when publicly announcing the selection of the company, such as the re-design of the outer wall of apartment buildings, etc. In the bidding procedure, seven companies were participating in the bidding procedure; however, seven companies did not meet the qualifications publicly notified; the remaining five bidding prices of the company were KRW 321,70,000, G H345,620, 1357,148,000, and KRW 371,70,000, and KRW 376,323,000,000, and KRW 376,323,000,000, and KRW 50,000,000 for the reason that the above representative of the company, including the defendant A, consented to the exclusion of the lowest bid price from bidding due to the failure of the plaintiff representative's notification of the bidding price.