Since the facts charged against the Defendants are not related to the facts charged in the final summary order and the single comprehensive offense, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that acquitted the Defendants, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

Where several acts falling under the name of the same crime or continuous acts are continuously conducted for a certain period under the single and continuous criminal intent, and the damage legal interests are the same, each act shall be punished by a comprehensive crime. According to the records, from September 3, 2002 to March 16, 2005, the defendants issued a summary order of KRW 500,000 to each of the above facts constituting a violation of the Electrical Appliances Control Act with the contents that the safety certification agency manufactured the electric temperature machine without obtaining the safety certification according to the model of the electrical appliances subject to safety certification from September 3, 2002 to March 16, 2005, and the above summary order was issued and confirmed. Defendant 2 is a company established for the purpose of manufacturing and selling the main apparatus such as electric temperature. Defendant 1 is the representative director of the corporation, and Defendant 2 is the representative director of the corporation, who is the defendant 2, and the defendants manufactured and sold the electric appliance without obtaining the safety certification from the safety certification agency three times within the criminal period indicated in the above summary order, the facts of this case are continuously established.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the prosecutor's appeal of this case is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Yoon Nam-nam (Presiding Judge)