A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (a fine of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the Prosecutor by the lower court to the Defendants is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Circumstances unfavorable to the judgment on the grounds of appeal: An old labor movement behavior in the old age, which ought to be resolved easily by exercising power in an unlawful manner under the name of realizing the rights and interests of workers, such as the instant crime.

A favorable circumstance: there seems to be a reason to consider the circumstances leading to the crime of this case.

Defendant

D has been subject to punishment once a fine due to a crime of double-class, and Defendant E is a first offender.

The sentencing criteria are not applicable to the case where the Defendants, including the above unfavorable circumstances, the age and character environment of the Defendants, the relationship to the victims, the motive means of crime (in particular, the form of interference with duties and the degree of the Defendants’ participation), and the circumstances after the crime, etc., have been selected as a fine as shown in the present arguments and the records of the lower court.

In full view of the foregoing, the lower court’s sentence imposed on the Defendants deviates from the sentencing discretion.

It is not recognized that it is unfair because it is too heavy or unfasible to the degree of evaluation.

3. Conclusion, the appeal by the Defendants and the appeal by the prosecutor against the Defendants is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.