All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable because the Defendant’s punishment (one hundred months of imprisonment, additional collection KRW 100,000) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) According to the evidence submitted by the lower court by misunderstanding the facts, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the part of the facts charged, which was not guilty, on the condition that the Defendant, together with D et al., was found not guilty. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial for a prosecutor’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the recognition of criminal facts ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that the aforementioned conviction is to be ensured, even if there is suspicion of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable dismissal, the determination ought to be made in the interests of the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 2011). Meanwhile, in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances to view that maintaining the first deliberation decision on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is significantly unfair, or in full view of the results of the first examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of the appellate trial, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the first deliberation decision on the sole ground that the first deliberation decision on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court’s judgment.

In particular, in the case of evidence supporting the facts charged,