The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is difficult to regard the Defendants as a business offender with a single and continuous criminal intent with the final summary order and the facts charged in this case’s single and continuous criminal intent, and the above facts appear to constitute a substantive concurrent criminal relationship. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Where multiple acts falling under the name of the same crime continue to be conducted for a certain period under the single and continuous criminal intent and the legal benefits from such damage are the same, each act shall be punished as a single comprehensive crime, and where a judgment has become final and conclusive with respect to a part of the crime in the relation of a single comprehensive crime, the final and conclusive judgment of acquittal shall be sentenced because res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment has not been expired with respect to the crime committed prior to the

(Supreme Court Decision 2006Do1252 Decided May 11, 2006). B.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the following facts are revealed: ① on April 3, 2006, Defendant B opened a “F Pharmacy” in Dong-gu, Daejeon and operated the above pharmacy with his father and two employees (in the investigation record No. 14); ② from April 3, 2006 to April 30, 2012, Defendant A received KRW 250,000 from Defendant B as an employee of the above pharmacy and worked as an employee of the above pharmacy; ② Defendant B received KRW 70-80,000 from the above pharmacy as a result of the following month, and then, Defendant B performed duties, such as gambling at the above pharmacy, or assisting the display counter in organizing (in the investigation record No. 27); ③ Defendant B visited the above pharmacy from the above court on September 10, 2012 to the 10-25, 201, Defendant B visited the said pharmacy as Defendant B’s employee of the said pharmacy.