The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

from the defendant.

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of the legal principles (the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act) provided that the Defendant recruited clients who want to apply for individual rehabilitation by telephone via his employees and prepared documents and submitted documents to the court. Since all documents were prepared in the name of the applicant in the name of the individual, they are different from that of the attorney-at-law to prepare and submit documents in his/her name.

In addition, Article 2 (1) 1, 2, and 6 of the Attorney-at-Law Act is not only a violation of Article 109 (1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act, but also a violation of Article 74 (1) 1 of the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act.

In this case, the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act which regulates the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act and the violation of the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act are related to a mutual agreement, and only the preparation and submission of documents submitted to the court with respect to the Attorney-at-Law Act which regulates the general legal affairs

Therefore, as long as a violation of the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act is established, the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act shall not be established separately.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the defendant of the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the relation between the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act and the violation of the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (two months of imprisonment, additional collection KRW 230 million) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor, the prosecutor will examine the reasons for appeal ex officio.