A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles: Although the defendant's intention or principal offender's intention is recognized, the court below acquitted the defendant about the special aiding and abetting, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

B. Improper sentencing: The sentence (five million won in penalty) of the lower judgment is too uneased and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In light of the misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles, the prosecutor also asserted as the grounds for appeal under this part of the judgment below, and the court below rejected the prosecutor’s assertion by stating the reasons in detail.

Examining the lower court’s judgment in comparison with the examination results and records of the Defendant at the time of the party deliberation, it is acceptable to accept the lower court’s determination as justifiable (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do18031, Mar. 22, 2017). Therefore, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

B. Although a suspended sentence of imprisonment with labor for an illegal part of the crime of violence was imposed, the crime of aiding and abetting the destruction of evidence during the suspended sentence was committed, there are unfavorable grounds for sentencing, such as the crime of aiding and abetting the destruction of evidence during the suspended sentence. However, the above crime is committed against the defendant, the defendant is led to the confession of the above crime, the criminal investigation or trial is not impeded, the crime appears to be committed according to the direction of E who committed a special bodily injury, there is no criminal record exceeding the suspended sentence of imprisonment, the defendant's age, family relation, economic situation, the background and motive leading to the crime, and all other matters concerning the sentencing as indicated in the records and changes in the records of this case are considered appropriate, and changes in circumstances are considered in the first instance trial.