Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B shall be punished by a fine of 3,000,000 won.

Defendant .

A. Defendant A’s sentence (10 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s sentence (2,00,000 won) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act of Korea, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and direct determination of sentencing with respect to Defendant A’s unfair assertion of sentencing, requires respect for sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the sentence of sentencing falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to refrain from imposing a sentence that differs from the first instance court on the sole ground that the sentence of sentencing of the first instance falls within the scope of discretion, it is somewhat different from the appellate court’s opinion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015; Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015; Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Sept. 23, 201). In light of the aforementioned legal principles, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court’s judgment in which Defendant A was subject to multiple kinds of crimes or criminal punishment after release, and the victims’ motive of the instant crimes.

3. The judgment on Defendant B’s wrongful assertion of sentencing was rendered twice as the crime of acquiring the goods from the office chief in the past, and the summary order was requested again in the same case.