A. The punishment imposed by Defendant A (one million won penalty) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

(c)

The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the defendants is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. The sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, and the discretionary determination is made within a reasonable and reasonable scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing as prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the first instance sentencing determination (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). (b) The circumstances alleged by the Defendants and the public prosecutor as an element of sentencing in the trial of a party were already discovered in the hearing process of the lower court, and there is no particular change in the situation in the sentencing guidelines after the sentence of the lower court was rendered.

Even if the Defendants were to have committed a crime partially denied from the trial, it is against all the Defendants, and Defendant B lacks the ability to pay a fine, it is difficult to view that it is a circumstance to change the sentencing of the lower court.

The Act on Special Cases concerning the Execution of Social Services by Fines Unpaid and Dong.