A. Defendant: The submission of a statement of grounds for appeal

(b) Public prosecutor: Unfair sentencing (a fine of three million won).

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the Defendant’s appeal, the Defendant filed an appeal on July 9, 2020 on the same day after the court was sentenced to a fine of three million won due to the obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. However, on August 5, 2020, the Defendant did not submit the appellate brief within the lawful period for submission of the appellate brief despite being served with the notification of the receipt of the notification of the notification of the receipt of the trial record by this court on August 5, 2020, and the petition of appeal does not contain any grounds for appeal. Furthermore, even

Therefore, the defendant's appeal should be dismissed on the ground that the appellate brief was not submitted in accordance with Article 361-4 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, as long as the prosecutor's appeal is sentenced to dismissal for the following reasons, the defendant's appeal shall not be separately dismissed, and shall be sentenced to a judgment, instead of an appeal.

B. It is reasonable to respect the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s determination of unfair sentencing, and where the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing legal doctrine, determined the sentence by comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances as stated in its reasoning.

In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court, no new circumstance exists to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial, and even considering all the sentencing factors indicated in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of crime, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too unfeasible.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion.