Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, the part against Defendant A and the judgment of second court shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for four years and .

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for the defendant A, a fine of KRW 2 million for the defendant L corporation and a fine of KRW 30 million for the defendant L corporation) and the sentence of the second court (the defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months and a suspended execution for 2 years) against the defendants are too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, Defendant A filed an appeal against the first and second judgment judgment, and this court decided to hold two appeals jointly. Each of the crimes of the first and second judgment against Defendant A is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and is subject to a single sentence pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the part against Defendant A among the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant corporation's assertion of unreasonable sentencing is still subject to a trial by this court, and this is examined below.

3. The circumstances favorable to the defendant include the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflected the mistake, that part of the investment amount was returned to the investors with dividends, etc., and that some victims agreed with the victim, etc.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is committed by A, the representative director of the defendant, without obtaining authorization or permission for the defendant's business, and the nature of the crime is not less than that of the defendant, and most investors' damages have not been recovered up to the trial. The crime of fund-raising without permission is highly likely to cause social harm, such as impairing the foundation for sound economic activities by affecting the individual as well as the family and the local community. Thus, the defendant's strict punishment is unfavorable to the defendant.

Various of the records and arguments of this case, including the above circumstances and other circumstances of the crime of this case.