A. The punishment of the court below (the fine of KRW 2,00,000) is too unreasonable.

B. On May 21, 2014, after the expiration of the lawful period for filing a statement of grounds of appeal, Defendant A made a statement to the effect that no statement was made as to the facts constituting an offense in the judgment below on the first day of May 21, 2014, but the statement is made in the appellate court on

Even if there is no ground for appeal as otherwise alleged in the statement, it cannot be deemed that there is a ground for appeal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Do1234, Sept. 22, 1998). Defendant A’s above assertion does not constitute a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. Defendant A is a primary offender, and Defendant B has no previous conviction and no previous conviction subject to the punishment of suspension of qualifications or more. However, the Defendants agreed with the victim.

There is no evidence to prove that there was a serious effort to reach an agreement, and it is difficult to view that there was any change in circumstances to change the punishment of the court below when it comes to the trial, and in full view of various sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments in the instant case, including the Defendants’ age and character, the motive and conduct of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., it is difficult to deem that the sentence imposed by the court below is excessively unreasonable.

Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, since all of the defendants' appeals are without merit, they are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.