The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The applicant for compensation within the scope of adjudication by this Court cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation (Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings) immediately becomes final and conclusive.

If an appeal against the judgment of conviction was filed, the confirmation of the compensation order is prevented, and the compensation order is transferred to the appellate court (Article 33(1) of the same Act). Of each application for compensation, the lower court dismissed the applicant M’s application for compensation from 417 early 2020 of the applicant G, H’s application for compensation and the applicant’s M’s application for compensation from 2020 early 585 of the applicant M, each part of the applicant G and M claimed damages from 2020 early, but did not issue the compensation order for delay. In the case of the applicant H, the lower court ordered the compensation order only 2.1 million won out of the claimed amount.

The judgment below

Since the order of dismissal of the remainder of the application for compensation is deemed to have been omitted by mistake, it shall be corrected ex officio as follows.

The compensation order was issued against the applicant for compensation and the remainder of compensation.

As above, this part is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court inasmuch as an appeal cannot be filed against the dismissed part as it became final and conclusive immediately, and the remainder of the cited part of the compensation order is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court. Meanwhile, even though the defendant raised an appeal, the defendant did not assert the grounds for appeal against this part, and even if ex officio examination, the grounds for revocation or alteration cannot be found. Thus, the cited part of the judgment of the court

2. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (the imprisonment of three years and the fine of five million won) is too unreasonable.

3. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the court below, and the sentencing of the court below does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (Supreme Court)