All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (unfair punishment)’s punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence is too unfilled and unfair.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, with a discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on which our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area of the first instance trial regarding the

In addition to these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The following are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant led to the confession and reflect of the instant crime; (b) the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment except for the sentence of a fine of KRW 300,000,000 by defraudation of the PC-type other than the instant case in 2017; and (c) the fact that it appears that there is no much benefit from the instant crime

On the other hand, the defendant's participation in the criminal act of licensing is a planned and organized act against many unspecified persons, and there is a great harm that leads to the society as a whole by massing a large number of victims, and the defendant assumes the victims directly from the so-called "alternative immunity" to the Financial Services Commission, and the degree of his/her participation and the responsibility for the crime is not easy. The victim involved in the criminal act reaches four persons, the amount of damage reaches KRW 127 million, and the victim did not make efforts to recover from damage, such as an agreement with the victims, etc. up to the trial.