All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant D Co., Ltd., at the time of construction, directly executed the instant building construction work under a contract with T (Representative M) Co., Ltd. (Representative M).

Therefore, Defendant A and B did not lend the name of Defendant D Co., Ltd. to J, and Defendant C also did not arrange the above name lending.

Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the Defendants of all the charges of this case. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence that the court below sentenced against the Defendants (Defendant A, B, and D: each fine of 7 million won is imposed on each of the Defendants, Defendant C: a fine of 1 million won is imposed on each of the Defendants) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court rejected all of the Defendants’ assertion on the different premise, on the following grounds: (a) determined that: (a) Defendant C, A, and B borrowed the name of the Defendant company and that J actually carried out the instant construction work as the contractor for the purpose of using it in the name of external contractor for the reason that the J was awarded a contract for the instant construction work from T, a main building company, but did not own a comprehensive construction license, on the ground that it was not holding a comprehensive construction license; (b) and (c) based on the fact that the construction was actually carried out as the contractor.

① The J agreed to externally perform the construction of the instant building upon the contract with M, the representative of T, a building owner, to undertake the construction on the basis of the contract: Provided, That the J drafted a contract and a confirmation letter to the effect that the J will assume all the responsibilities for the lending of the name of the construction business to the Defendant Company on the ground that the Plaintiff did not hold a comprehensive construction license.

2. The J shall follow the name of the Defendant Company, a member of the Defendant Company A and B, through Defendant C.