1. All of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance concerning Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A. Fines.

1. According to the records on Defendant K’s appeal, Defendant K filed an appeal against the lower judgment on April 25, 2014, and did not submit the statement of grounds of appeal within 20 days from May 28, 2014 even when the receipt of the lawful receipt of the trial record on May 28, 2014. The petition of appeal does not state the grounds for appeal in the petition of appeal and does not contain any reasons for ex officio investigation even after examining the records. Thus, Defendant K’s appeal shall be dismissed by judgment, subject to Article 361-4 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal by the defendant A and the prosecutor

A. The summary of the grounds for appeal (1) Defendant A’s punishment (2 million won of fine) of Defendant A1’s judgment is too unreasonable.

(2) Each sentence of the judgment of the second instance against the Defendants by the prosecutor (a fine of KRW 4 million is imposed on the Defendants K, Defendant L: a fine of KRW 700,000,000, Defendant M, and N: each fine of KRW 1.5 million, Defendant A: a fine of KRW 400,000,000,000,000) is unfair.

B. (1) The judgment of the court below of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance are in a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Since the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance together with each of the cases of the judgment of the court below, each of the above crimes should be sentenced to a single punishment in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, among the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance, all of the parts of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance concerning

(2) In full view of all the facts pertaining to Defendant K, L, M, and N’s judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, the amount of damage caused by the instant crime and the profits acquired by the said Defendants, and the sentencing specified in the records and arguments of the said Defendants, the punishment of the second instance judgment against the said Defendants is deemed appropriate, and thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

C. According to the conclusion, the first instance judgment and the second.