Defendant .

A. The first instance court rejected the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation of the first instance court, and the case for the application for compensation order was immediately finalized as it is not possible to appeal the judgment dismissing the application for compensation pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

Therefore, the rejection of the application for compensation order in the first instance judgment shall be excluded from the scope of the trial of the party.

B. The second instance court accepted the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation of the second instance court, and the Defendant did not assert any grounds for appeal against this part, and even if ex officio examination is conducted, the grounds for revocation or alteration cannot be found. Thus, the part citing the order for compensation among the second instance judgment shall remain intact.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence (the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and the second instance: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and eight months) sentenced by the first and second instance courts (with respect to the second instance judgment of the first and second instance court) is too unreasonable.

B. The second judgment of the court below (with respect to the second judgment of the court below) is too unfasible and unfair.

3. Judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal following the consolidation shall be considered ex officio prior to the judgment.

The first and second original judgments were sentenced to each of the defendants, and the defendant appealed against all the first and second original judgments, and the prosecutor appealed against each of the second original judgments, and this court decided to concurrently examine each of the above appeal cases.

However, each of the crimes in the judgment of the first and second court against the defendant is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one sentence should be sentenced pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the part of the defendant's case among the judgment of the first and the judgment of the second court cannot be maintained

4. As such, the part of the judgment of the first instance and the part of the judgment of the second instance on the defendant's case are reversed ex officio. Thus, without examining the defendant's and the prosecutor's allegation of unfair sentencing, Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.