Among the guilty parts and the defendants, the number of crimes table 3 and 4 in the judgment of the court below shall be respectively set forth.

A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of facts, Defendant B, Inc. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”), was obligated to pay KRW 300 million to F. Defendant A, and Defendant A, in turn, assigned the instant advertising bulletin facilities to F in order to repay the said debt of Defendant Company or provide it as security for the said debt.

Nevertheless, the court below judged that Defendant A had made a false transfer of property in order to escape compulsory execution. The court below erred by misunderstanding the fact and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment with labor for four months and one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

(b) Any of the following persons shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than one year or by a fine not exceeding ten million won:

3. Any person who displays or installs an advertisement, etc., in violation of Article 4 (1), 5 (1) or (2) 2 and 4, and Article 4 (1) or 4 (1) or (1) (excluding advertisements, etc. prescribed by Presidential Decree), among areas, places, or objects referred to in the subparagraphs of Article 3 (1), in order to preserve scenic landscapes and public morals, prevent harm to the public, and create a healthy and pleasant living environment, shall not display or install any advertisement, etc. (excluding advertisements, etc. prescribed by Presidential Decree) in such areas, places, or objects as prescribed by Presidential Decree, in order to prevent harm to the public, and shall be deemed that a person who fails to remove the advertisement, even after the lawful installation

Nevertheless, by misapprehending the legal principles, the lower court determined that the Defendants did not constitute “person who installed advertisements, etc.” as prescribed in the above Act.

(2) The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A of unreasonable sentencing is too unjustifiable.

2. Determination

A. The grounds for appeal for ex officio determination are relevant to the grounds for appeal.