The part of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding a compensation order and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Two years of imprisonment.

The court below rejected the application for compensation filed by 32 C, 54 D, 61 E, 77 F, 79 G, 97 H, 103 I, 109 J, 113K, 121 L, 125 M, 131 N and 133O Nos. 19 P, 74 D, 75 D, 75 Q, 95 LK, 96 R, 98 E, 101 QJ, 102 N, 102N, T, 107 R, J, 108 SN, 112, L, 123 M, 124 M, 126M, 128, and 133O, respectively, and accepted the application for compensation filed by each applicant for compensation filed by each of the above TX.

An applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing an application for compensation or accepting a part thereof (Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings), and the foregoing dismissal and part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be excluded from the scope of adjudication of this

In addition, in cases where an appeal against a conviction is filed, the confirmation of a compensation order is interrupted, and the compensation order is transferred to the appellate court along with the accused case (Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings), but the accused did not assert any grounds for appeal against this part, and even if examined ex officio, the grounds for revocation or alteration cannot be found. Thus, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance that cited the entire compensation order should be maintained as it is.

(However, "1,040,00" in the column of compensation amount of No. 47 No. 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance, which is obvious that it is a clerical error pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, shall be corrected to "1,040,00". The summary of the grounds for appeal is that each of the court of first instance (the judgment of the court of first instance shall be corrected to "2,00,000". The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the court of second instance is too unreasonable.

The first instance court’s sentence of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

As to the judgment of ex officio, the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance, and this court decided to consolidate the two appeals cases.

Each crime of the judgment of the court below is defined in Article 37 of the Criminal Act.