All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is F and G separate enterprises, and even if two domestic enterprises are the same, the two enterprises are participating in the tender and are somewhat increasing the probability of successful tender, thereby impairing the fairness of the tender.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The lower court: (a) as Defendant A’s early car at the time of the establishment of G, Defendant B provided the funds established by Defendant A and delivery vehicles, most of collection and office equipment, etc.; and (b) the Defendants provided and received money exceeding KRW 200 million through each company’s business account and Defendant A’s personal account; (c) the Defendants asserted that the said money was loaned money to Defendant A and received payment after the payment; (d) the Defendants did not prepare a relevant loan certificate or account, and did not state the detailed terms and conditions of lending and repayment; (b) the F and G failed to report the same bidding notice for a period of one year and one year; and (c) the same date and similar period of time. Although the normal bidding period was short-term, it is difficult to view that the transfer of the said money was merely identical to the transfer of the said money in the name of Defendant B’s account, and (e) the transfer of the said money to the same account was made in the same order with the transfer of the said money in the name of the Plaintiff’s account.