Each judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for three years and fine for 1,900,000 won.

The defendant above.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) In the judgment of the second court of mistake of facts, the defendant did not have any custody of the victim L, Q, and N jointly with other co-defendants, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below on the defendant (the first judgment of the court below: imprisonment of two years and six months and fine of 3.7 billion won, and imprisonment of 2 years and one year) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the first instance court on the Defendant by the prosecutor (an unreasonable sentencing on the first instance judgment) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the judgment of ex officio determination (i.e., the first judgment and the second judgment of the court below against the defendant were consolidated. Each of the above concurrent cases against the defendant should be sentenced to one punishment pursuant to Article 38(1)2 of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, each judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

The Prosecutor reversed the written indictment and the amendment of the written indictment on the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the facts charged in the crime No. 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance is withdrawn (the first instance, all of the sales tax invoices issued in the same taxable period and the total value of the supply by the buyer was charged, and all of the sales tax invoices issued were deleted in the modified facts charged), and some of the additional charges (from January 8, 2013 to January 15, 2013) were added (the issuance of false sales tax invoices). The court permitted this.

As such, at the court of the first instance, the subject of the judgment of the first instance was changed, and the first offense of the first instance as indicated in the judgment of the first instance is a concurrent offense relation with each of the crimes listed in the judgment of the second and the second instance as indicated in the judgment of the second instance as stated in the judgment of the first instance, and Article 37 of the Criminal Act is a concurrent offense, and one punishment shall

Therefore, each.