A. In light of the fact that the defense counsel’s defendants did not commit the instant crime for the purpose of speculation with a view to aging and speculation, the benefits acquired through the instant crime are not much high, and the Korea Industrial Complex Corporation did not cause losses due to the Defendants’ act, the sentence of the lower court that sentenced the Defendants to a fine of KRW 30 million is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the fact that Defendant A disposed of the portion of public land in an industrial complex on seven occasions from September 24, 2015 to October 30, 2015, and the transaction amount reaches KRW 18.95 billion, the lower court’s sentence against Defendant A is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The crime of this case committed by Defendant A is not proper to dispose of the portion of the public land acquired before five years have elapsed since the date of partial acquisition of the portion of the public land in an industrial complex, and the portion of the public land acquired before the lapse of five years from the date of partial acquisition of the portion of the public land should be transferred to the management agency. However, the crime of this case committed by Defendant A is not appropriate to have been committed by disposing of KRW 13,570.9 percent of the portion of the public land in H owned by the company G (a mutual company after its change) and owned by the representative director seven times from Sep. 24, 2015 to Oct. 30, 2015 to dispose of KRW 18.95,2480,000,000. Such crime is deemed to have been committed by selling the portion of the public land in the industrial complex for the purpose of systematically managing the location of the industry, promoting industrial clustering, and promoting the construction of the factory, and thus, it is necessary to be punished against the legislative intent corresponding to A.