The judgment below

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

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

Defendant .

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is unreasonable because the court below's imprisonment with prison labor for six months, two years of suspended execution, 80 hours of community service work, six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the defendant B, one year of suspended execution is too uneasible.

[Defendant A filed an appeal against the lower judgment on June 30, 2014. However, on August 21, 2014, Defendant A failed to submit the statement of grounds for appeal by September 11, 2014, which was the deadline for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal (the date for filing the statement of grounds for appeal should be September 17, 2014, and the statement of grounds for appeal to the effect of unjust sentencing was submitted.

[2] On September 13, 2013, Defendant A was sentenced to ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor’s ex officio as to Defendant A, Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment for 8 months and 2 years of suspension of execution at the Seoul Central District Court on September 13, 2013. The above judgment became final and conclusive on August 20, 2014 (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013Da3656, 2013No3270, Supreme Court Decision 204Do6029). Each of the crimes in the judgment of the court below is in the relation of the above injury for which the judgment became final and conclusive and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act with the injury for which the judgment becomes final and conclusive, and the part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A cannot be maintained any more.

In addition, even when considering the sentencing of Defendant A ex officio, it appears that the act occurred in the process of replacing the mobile phone device while allowing his/her children to use the mobile phone device installed at the time when he/she operated the corporation C without default of fees, and in light of the victim's circumstance of the complaint, the time and amount of unpaid fees, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below against Defendant A is too unreasonable). 3. The process of the crime, motive and contents of the prosecutor's judgment on the argument of unfair sentencing on Defendant B, and there is no history of punishment.