Part of the judgment of the first instance court shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, AJ.

1. The first instance court’s judgment dismissing the prosecution as to the violation of the Labor Standards Act with respect to H and I among the facts charged in the instant case, and sentenced the judgment of conviction as to the remaining facts charged, and only the Defendant appealed as to the guilty part (the Defendant submitted a petition of appeal to the effect that he appealed against the judgment of the first instance court, but there is no benefit of appeal as to the dismissed part of the above indictment, and thus the Defendant’s appeal is the same). Therefore, since the dismissed part of the judgment of the first instance court becomes final and conclusive, the judgment of the first instance court is limited to the convicted part of the judgment of the first instance court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of the Act and improper sentencing);

A. misunderstanding of facts and legal principles 1) The Defendant’s issuance of a forged surety insurance policy to theO by mistake (misunderstanding of facts) and there is no relation between the fact that the Defendant issued a forged surety insurance policy and the O’s disposal act.

2) Each fraud against the AJ and Z (defluence of facts, misunderstanding of the law), the AJ and the Z did not properly pay the price at the time of concluding the contract with the AJ and the Z, and there was no deception by the said victims.

3) The violation of the Labor Standards Act with respect to AF and AL (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of the law), and AF and AL do not constitute workers.

B. The punishment sentenced by the first instance court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances as revealed in the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the first instance court in light of the fact that the first instance judgment rendered a guilty verdict on this part of the facts charged, as to the fraud against O, the relationship between the Defendant’s delivery of forged performance guarantee insurance policy toO and theO’s disposal (payment) is sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.

(1) The O shall make a contract on the installation of solar power generation facilities between the defendant around November 27, 2013 with the introduction of the seal.