A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding the legal doctrine, the Defendant was in possession of cash cards for the intent and purpose of delivering them to others, and delivered the said cash cards to others on the date of actual possession. It is difficult to view that custody is punished separately from delivery.

Nevertheless, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance which found the defendant guilty by deeming the act of custody as a separate crime is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2) The sentence of the lower court (the part against the Defendant in the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months and 2 months: imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence of the sentence on the accused in the first instance judgment of the Prosecutor (unfair sentencing) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

The judgment of the court below in the first and second instances against the defendant was rendered, and the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court below in the first and second instances, and the prosecutor filed each appeal against the judgment of the defendant in the first and second instances, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing of the court below in the first and second instances.

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant and each part of the judgment of the court of second instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, a single sentence shall be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant and

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined in the following paragraphs.

3. Judgment on the misapprehension of the legal principle of the defendant

A. On August 4, 2020, the Defendant of this part of the facts charged was instructed to collect the cash card delivered as hand freight from an employee of singinging off (hereinafter “C”) in the light cargo storage room at the Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan New Distribution Complex (Distribution Dong). The Defendant received an instruction to collect the cash card delivered as hand freight from an employee of singing off (hereinafter “C”) around 08:05.