The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The application for compensation of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (two years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the defendant, who made a judgment, made a confession of all of the crimes of this case and withdraws from the criminal organization, shows his attitude of breaking his mistake in depth, and that there is no past record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine, etc., shall be considered as the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

However, each of the crimes of this case committed by the defendant by joining a criminal organization with a high social risk and acting as its members, and committed a crime against many victims, such as bodily injury, assault, damage to property, interference with business, etc., or tracking an abandoned organizational source, and thus, the nature of the crime was very poor, and not completely recovered from the victims until now, and most victims expressed their intent to punish the defendant, etc. shall be considered as disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, all of the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court sentencing committee (at least two years of imprisonment), it is not recognized that the sentence of the lower court that rendered the lowest sentence of the above recommended punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. The applicant filed a claim for compensation of KRW 7 million in total, including medical expenses, lost profits, consolation money, etc., because he/she suffered an injury from the Defendant.

However, there is a lack of objective data to determine the scope of treatment costs and lost profit which the defendant is dissatisfied with the scope of compensation liability, and compensation money is not subject to compensation order.

Therefore, this case.