The part concerning Defendant C and the second judgment of the court of first instance shall be reversed.

Defendant

C. 7 months of imprisonment.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The following punishment of the court below against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B The first instance judgment of the defendant C1: Imprisonment with prison labor for six months, additional collection of 18.8 million won: the second instance judgment of the defendant C1: imprisonment for six months, additional collection of 19 million won: the punishment of the first instance judgment of the prosecutor defendant B against the defendant of the defendant of the March of imprisonment for three months is too uneasible and unreasonable.

Judgment

We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by Defendant C prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

This court held two appeals cases against Defendant C concurrently and tried, and each of the offenses in the decision of the court below are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one sentence shall be sentenced pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the part against Defendant C and the second judgment of the court of first instance cannot be maintained any more.

Defendant

It is more favorable that the defendant's decision on the argument of unfair sentencing between B and the defendant's wrong recognition, and the return of the received money and valuables.

However, the fact that the defendant's taking advantage of his status as a public official receives money and valuables in relation to the employment of a public official in technical service is not good, and that the amount received is not less than 188 million won, is disadvantageous.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, etc., it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

In conclusion, there is a ground for ex officio reversal as above, the part concerning Defendant C among the judgment of the court of first instance pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for appeal by Defendant C, and the second judgment is reversed, and the appeal by Defendant B and the prosecutor is all without merit. Thus, Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not applicable.