The part of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed in entirety.

A fine of 2,500,000 won is imposed on a defendant.

1. The first instance court’s judgment as to the scope of a party member’s judgment as to the first instance court’s judgment is in violation of the Labor Standards Act and the violation of the retirement allowances payment security for unpaid workers among the pertinent facts charged, and the prosecution is dismissed, and the remaining facts charged are dismissed. Since only the Defendant appealed from the first instance judgment only to the conviction and the part dismissing the public prosecution for which the Defendant and the prosecutor did not appeal, the scope of a party member’s judgment as to the first instance judgment is limited to the part which the first instance court convicted (hereinafter referred to as “the first instance court’s judgment and the second instance judgment”). The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows.

A. In fact, the Defendant, misunderstanding the legal principles, agreed not to raise a civil or criminal objection in relation to the victim I and the automobile repair cost, but the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged at the second instance court. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles and misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentencing of the lower court’s unfair sentencing is too inappropriate.

3. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

The first and second court sentenced the defendant to a separate trial against the defendant by the Gwangju District Court 2016 High Court 2016 High Court 1470, 2016 High Court 734, and sentenced the defendant to a punishment for each punishment. The defendant filed an appeal against the judgment below, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings with respect to the above appeal cases. Each of the crimes of the judgment below that sentenced the defendant to a fine should be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of punishment subject to aggravated concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be exempted from all of its reversal.

As seen above.