The judgment below

Defendant A’s conviction is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Prosecutor’s grounds of appeal 1) misunderstanding of facts (the grounds of appeal by the Prosecutor) (1) in the Prosecutor’s Office: (a) there was a clear statement in the Prosecutor’s Office that “A made many proposals that Defendant B would give rise to the supply of goods at a container, and Defendant B would provide goods at a container by manipulating the sales tax invoice amount appropriately; (b) Defendant B knew in advance that Defendant B would have entered a container at a level of KRW 50,000 per ton; (c) Defendant B would supply goods in advance by properly manipulating Defendant B and the tax invoice; and (d) in this industry, Defendant A made a clear statement to the effect that it would be possible for business members to supply goods at a container in consultation with the Chairman of the Customer; and (b) Defendant H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”).

(1) The maximum amount of credit extended to the victim G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) was gradually increased and the increased cost related thereto is also called “victim Co.,

(3) The fact that Defendant A received plastic materials from Z and received them from Z around 2008 and made a statement to Defendant A that there was a deficit that Defendant A left the Z. ④ Defendant A used the method of forging a tax invoice and a written request for confirmation of claims and obligations, and it is difficult to deem that Defendant A sold PS (PS) at a low price in H, and that it is difficult to deem that he was supplied with the PS at a pressure for sales performance under the circumstances where he is responsible for all of the facts discovered, if he provided meals or money, it appears that the method of account transfer would not have been used. Defendant A actively asked Defendant B to sell PS, and thus, it is natural to come to contact with Defendant B.