The part on Defendant A and the second judgment of the court of first instance shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for fifteen years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and violation of Acts and subordinate statutes (Defendant B), Defendant B, etc., did not have any public contest with Defendant A, etc. as referred to in paragraph (1) of the first judgment of the lower court, and Defendant B was aware of the fact that the goods imported by Defendant A were written on April 18, 2018, and did not know until that time.

Therefore, Defendant B did not have conspired or participated in the crime of importing and selling other penphones except for the crime listed in No. 22 No. 1 of the judgment of the first instance.

Nevertheless, the first instance judgment which found Defendant B guilty of all the charges is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts and violating the law.

B. The respective sentence of the lower court against the Defendants (Defendant A: 15 years of imprisonment with prison labor of the first instance court and additional collection, and one year of imprisonment with prison labor of the second instance court and additional collection, Defendant B: 7 years of imprisonment with prison labor and additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Each appeal case against the first and second original judgment was consolidated in this court's ex officio judgment as to Defendant A. Since each of the offenses against Defendant A and the second original judgment is a concurrent offense under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, this court which simultaneously rendered the judgment is a single sentence in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the part against Defendant A and the second judgment cannot be maintained as they are in the first judgment.

3. Determination on Defendant B’s grounds of appeal

A. (1) The first instance court’s judgment of the first instance court on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and violation of laws and regulations was found guilty of the facts charged that Defendant B conspired with Defendant A, etc. to commit the act of importing and selling each of the instant phiphones in collusion with Defendant A. (A) Defendant A consistently recognized that he imported and sold phiphones into the Republic of Korea, such as the facts stated in the first instance judgment.