All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

The sentence against the accused shall be determined by a fine of KRW 1,400,000.

The defendant above.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the first instance judgment: the fine of KRW 700,00, the second instance judgment: the fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, this Court tried to examine the two cases of appeal by combining the two cases of appeal by the defendant. The crimes of each case deliberated in the trial by the court in question are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be reversed in its entirety.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without examining the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, since there exists a ground for ex officio reversal as seen earlier, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by the court is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of injury), Articles 74 (1) 3 and 44-7 (1) 3 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (the point of circulation of information causing fears), the selection of fines for each crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that the defendant repents and reflects his mistake, that the above victim does not want the punishment against the defendant under an agreement with the victim E, and that there is difficulty in living as the visually impaired and the health conditions are worse.

However, the crime of this case is committed.