Defendant

All appeals filed against the Defendants by A, B, D, E, F, H, K, L, M, N, P, S, T, V, and Y and prosecutor's appeal.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A, B, D, E, F, H, I,K, L, M, P, P, S, T,V, Y (hereinafter “the Defendants of the appeal of this case”) against the Defendants of the appeal of this case (hereinafter “Defendant A, B, and D”) is too unreasonable as to the Defendants of the appeal of this case (the Defendant E, K, N, P, T, T, Y: one year of the suspended sentence of eight months of imprisonment, and one year of the suspended sentence of four months of imprisonment, Defendant F, H, I, L, M,O, T, and Y: three million won of each fine).

B. Each of the punishments against the Defendants of the lower court by the Prosecutor (as stated in the above paragraph (a) (as stated in Defendant C, R, U, W, X, Z, and the Defendants of the appeal in this case) is deemed to be too unfasible and unfair.

2. We also examine the Defendants of the instant appeal and the Prosecutor’s wrongful assertion in sentencing.

The period and scale of the instant dispute action are small, and the degree of damage to the Korean Railroad is also deemed to be significant, and the extent of damage to the Korean Railroad Corporation is also deemed to be reasonable by the citizens of the actual users of the railroad traffic during the period of the dispute action, etc. are also disadvantageous to the Defendants.

Meanwhile, each of the instant disputes was conducted in a peaceful way without accompanying violence, and it appears that members of the essential business were trying to reduce the damage to the people due to the instant dispute’s act by failing to participate in the dispute’s act. The following circumstances are favorable to the Defendants: (a) the agreement entered into between the Korea Railroad Corporation and the Korea Railroad Construction Corporation around May 14, 2010; and (b) the collective agreement entered into between the two parties around May 14, 2010.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendants’ status in the railroad union and the role in each of the above disputes, the Defendants’ history of identical and similar crimes, the Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, environment, the circumstances and consequence of the instant crime, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, even considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendants and the Prosecutor for each of the grounds for appeal.