The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and one month.

Defendant

C.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence (Defendant B: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and two months, and Defendant C: 10 months) declared by the court below to the Defendants is too unreasonable.

B. The above punishment sentenced by the prosecutor by the court below to the defendants is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Ex officio determination (part on Defendant B) prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant B and the Prosecutor, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for eight months due to a violation of the Immigration Control Act at the Daegu District Court on December 12, 2019, and for two years of suspended execution, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on February 21, 2020 is significant in this court.

Therefore, the crime of violation of the Immigration Control Act and the crime of this case, which became final and conclusive, are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment is determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment by taking into account equity and equity in cases where the judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the judgment of the

B. As to the Defendant C and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing on each of the above Defendant Defendant C and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing, Defendant C and the prosecutor’s each of the above Defendant had been sentenced to a summary order of KRW 10 million as a result of the violation of the Immigration Control Act around July 2018, even though they had been served on the charge of violating the Immigration Control Act, and from January 2019, Defendant C and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing were employed as a foreigner of unlawful stay. In addition, the Defendant C and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing are disadvantageous circumstances, such as inducing A to make a false statement that he/she employed an illegal stay, and leading A to the criminal escape. The Defendant C and the prosecutor’s assertion are not acknowledged, taking into account all of the facts charged in this case, favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the said Defendant recognized all of the facts charged in this case, and reflects his/her mistake, and all of the sentencing conditions as indicated in the records and arguments.