All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and Sentencing in sentencing) 1) The client AF 58 of the [Attachment Table 58] in the lower court’s judgment as to the violation of the law by attorney-at-law was the same representative with the Defendant.

As the friendship of AG, AG provided assistance to the Y father without any consideration by explaining the economic situation of the Y father.

However, after the termination of the subsequent case, Y found the defendant and received all money from the other party.

At the same time, 100,000 won is only a linen with the marking of the Roman, and there was no set of consideration while aiding the Y father.

2) In light of the fact-misunderstanding and misunderstanding of legal principles as to the calculation of the amount of collection, the part where the amount of payment is indicated below KRW 100,000 in the list of crimes attached to the court below (1) is indicated as expenses by the defendant while handling legal affairs, and thus, the defendant received profits in consideration of

It is difficult to see that an attorney's assertion that the offense of violation of the law of defense is not established even though an attorney disputes the amount of additional collection, and therefore, in the judgment part, it is also necessary to determine whether the offense of violation of the law of defense has been established).B) Of the case of the crime list (1) in the judgment of the court below, the amount of additional collection for the following 4 cases was calculated (the investigation record 927-928 pages).

① 10,000 won was received from J in view of the relationship between the Defendant and the J, as a person who had been living together with the Defendant and his family.

It is difficult to see it.

② In light of the fact that Q 34 clients was a family member between the Defendant and Q 60,00 won, the Defendant received benefits from Q 60,000 won.

It is difficult to see it.

(3) The client S 38 is a third village of the defendant's middle school-friendly AH, and in view of the relationship between the defendant and S, the defendant is from AH.