The remainder of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding the compensation order and the dismissal of an application for compensation order among the judgment of the court of second instance.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants A, B, and C filed an appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance on the grounds of mistake of facts and illegality in sentencing, and Defendant B appealed on the date of the first trial of the appellate court, and only for the grounds of illegality in sentencing.

Defendant A and C stated on the third trial date of the appellate trial that they withdrawn the assertion of mistake on facts and recognized the modified facts charged.

In addition, Defendant I appealed against the second judgment of the court below on the grounds of misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles and misunderstanding of sentencing, and misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles on the six-time trial date of the appellate court. Thus, Defendant I should decide only on the grounds of unfair appeal for sentencing against the above Defendants.

Defendant

The judgment of the first instance court against A, B, C, and D (the imprisonment of two years and ten months, confiscation, and defendant B: the imprisonment of two years and eight months; the confiscation; the confiscation; the imprisonment of two years and ten months; the confiscation; the confiscation of the defendant D; the confiscation; the confiscation of the defendant: the two years and four months and four months); and the decision of the second instance against the defendants (the imprisonment of one year; the imprisonment of one year; the defendant B; the defendant C: the six months; the imprisonment of six months; the defendant D: the imprisonment of six months; the defendant M; the imprisonment of six months; the defendant M; the imprisonment of six months; the defendant I; the defendant CV; the imprisonment of ten months; and the defendant CV) are too unreasonable.

B. Defendant CV’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts did not individually conspired with, or shared the commission of, the commission of the crime as stated in Article 2(4) of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the defendant by misunderstanding the facts.

(c)

The 2nd judgment decision of the prosecutor against the defendants of the improper assertion of sentencing is unfair as it is too unfortunate.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

1) First, with respect to the judgment of the first instance court, Defendant A, B, C, and D, the Defendants and the Prosecutor filed each appeal against the judgment of the second instance, and this Court decided to hold the two appeals together.