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

The first instance court held that the defendant was a defendant.

1. The appellate court's punishment (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for the first instance court, and second instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for the second instance court's order: six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of the second instance court's order of 2016 higher order of 2030; one year of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of the second instance order of 2016 higher order of 2144) is too unreasonable.

2. Each appeal case against each of the judgment below was consolidated ex officio prior to examining the grounds for appeal by the defendant on this part of the judgment of ex officio as to the part concerning the defendant's 2030 crime of the first instance judgment and the second instance judgment. The first instance judgment and the second instance judgment on the second instance judgment constitute concurrent crimes under Article 38 of the Criminal Act and the first instance judgment and the second instance judgment are concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act and thus, one sentence should be imposed at the same time in the first instance court. In this regard, this part of the judgment below cannot be maintained any further.

3. Of the judgment below of the second instance, the judgment of the court below on the ground of appeal as to the part concerning the crime of the 2016 Highest 214 Case was rendered, and the fact that this part of the judgment on the ground of appeal was sold by a company which has no value to commit this part of the crime, which caused damages exceeding a total of 2.2 billion won to the victims of 295 victims, and the crime was not made efforts to pay damages, and there is no good condition after the crime was committed, such as where the defendant has not been making efforts to avoid the investigation, and where the defendant has escaped for a long time

However, the defendant was in the same position as the chief of the headquarters at the time of committing this part.

There is a need to consider equity in punishment for M and N, and the judgment was finalized upon the sentence of each suspended sentence, and the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year at the Seoul Central District Court on June 30, 201 and two years of suspended sentence for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court on June 30, 201.

7. 8. Since the judgment became final and conclusive, this part of the case should be considered in light of the circumstances in which the judgment could have been tried together with the final and conclusive fraud.