Of the judgment of the court below of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance, the part of the judgment on the crime of 2015 order 3096 shall be reversed, respectively.

Defendant .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment of Defendant 2’s decision on the judgment of the lower court (the part on the crime of the 2015 highest order 3497 of the judgment: 6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(b) The sentence of the first instance judgment of the Prosecutor (two years of suspended sentence in the month of imprisonment with prison labor) is too unhued and unfair;

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal, the defendant examined ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, and the defendant filed each appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance against the judgment of the court of first instance, and this court decided to concurrently examine each of the above appeals cases.

The crime of the first instance judgment and the second instance judgment of the second instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. As to this, one sentence shall be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. The above part of the judgment of the court below shall not be maintained any further (Provided, That for the crime of the second instance judgment of the second instance which is not concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the defendant's appeal shall be dismissed in consideration of the following factors). 3. We examine the judgment on the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing; 3. The defendant's appeal is against the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing; 3. The defendant's confession of the crime and the agreement with the victim is favorable grounds; 18 million won is not stated; 4. The defendant has been punished for the same crime; and 4.0 million won has been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of punishment as the defendant for the same crime; and in particular, the defendant has been punished for the same offense on July 28, 2015.

In full view of the above sentencing factors, in full view of the Defendant’s age, family relation, economic situation, background and motive leading to the commission of the crime, and all other matters on the sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments of this case, the judgment of the court below is deemed appropriate, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

4. If so, the defendant's appeal against the crime of "the 2015 Highest 3497" in the judgment of the court below is justified.