Of the judgment of the court below, the part on the defendant B and the part on the defendant AE in the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding the judgment of the court below regarding the mistake of facts 1 and 2, Defendant B only applied for the transfer authorization in accordance with the medical certificate lawfully prepared by a doctor, and there was no unlawful act regarding the preparation of a medical certificate and the application for authorization for the transfer of taxi licenses.

(2) Each sentence sentenced by the lower court on Defendant B (the first instance court: imprisonment of January 1 and February, and the second instance court: imprisonment of April) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant AC (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, Defendant AC has trusted the written diagnosis issued by the doctor in charge, and there is no fact that Co-Defendant A and Co-Defendant A

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant AC (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and probation) is too unreasonable.

C. Defendant AE’s imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court against Defendant AE is unreasonable.

(1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor concerning the part of acquittal against Defendant AC in the judgment of the second instance, the prosecutor can find the guilty of this part of the facts charged.

(2) The sentence imposed by the court below on Defendant B, and each sentence imposed by the court below on Defendant AC, AE, and L, are too uneasible and unfair.

2. Regarding the judgment below above ex officio, the prosecutor filed each appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance against Defendant B, and the court of first instance against Defendant B decided to hold a concurrent trial. Each of the crimes of the court below against Defendant B is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and a single punishment should be imposed within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, both the judgment of the court of first instance against Defendant B and the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be exempt from the reversal.

However, the judgment below has the above reasons for ex officio destruction.

Defendant 2.