The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.

public prosecutor and prosecutor;

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s imprisonment (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s punishment (fine 10 million won) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

C. Defendant D’s punishment (fine 10 million won) is too unreasonable. D. It is so unfair that Defendant D’s punishment is too unreasonable.

The prosecutor (the defendant C) sentenced by the court below to the defendant C (one year and two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, probation, and community service order) is too unfluent and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s assertion regarding Defendant A committed each of the instant crimes, despite the suspension period of execution, which was imposed on August 27, 2012 by having been sentenced to two years to imprisonment for a violation of the Fishery Resources Management Act on December 27, 2012 in the Daegu District Court Branch Branch Branch of the Daegu District Court for the purpose of violating the Fishery Resources Management Act on June 27, 2013, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on June 27, 2013, and the Defendant played an important role, such as providing vessel V to the instant crime, and transporting and selling the caught species. However, the Defendant’s assertion is unfair on account of the following: (a) the Defendant made a confession of all of the instant crimes; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crimes during the suspended execution period for the previous crimes; and (c) the Defendant committed the instant crimes during the suspended execution period until the date on which the suspended execution for the previous crimes was committed; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character, environment, family relationship, etc., the punishment of the Defendant’s allegation is justified.

B. As to the Defendants’ assertion, the Defendants confession all of the instant crimes and reflect their mistake, Defendant B did not have any record of punishment for the same kind of crime, Defendant D did not have any record of punishment for the same crime except for those sentenced to a fine once for the same crime in around 1991, and the degree of the Defendants’ participation is compared to the other accomplices.