The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

Defendant

B.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment for 8 months, 2 years of suspended sentence, 40 hours of lectures for child abuse treatment, 2 million won of fines, and 10 hours of completion of child abuse treatment programs) of the lower court is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Article 74 of the Child Welfare Act provides that if a representative of a corporation, or an agent, employee, or other servant of a corporation or individual commits an offence under Article 71 in connection with the business of the corporation or individual, not only shall such offender be punished, but also the corporation or individual shall be punished by a fine under the relevant provisions.

In light of the form of the above provision, if an agent, employee, or other servant (hereinafter “offender”) of a corporation or individual commits a violation of Article 71 of the Child Welfare Act, the corporation or individual (hereinafter “business owner”) by each act violates Article 74 of the Child Welfare Act, and each other’s violation of Article 74 of the Child Welfare Act is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

In this case, Defendant A, an offender, committed several violations of Article 71 of the Child Welfare Act, and Defendant B, the employer, also committed violations of Article 74 of the Child Welfare Act, and each of the above acts of Defendant B is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, since the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of law that affected the judgment of the number of crimes, the part of the judgment of the court below with respect to Defendant B cannot be maintained.

B. The instant crime against Defendant A’s assertion of unfair sentencing is that the Defendant, who is a kindergarten teacher, shouldered the arms of the children who the Defendant is in need of their care and protection, and the nature of the relevant crime is not good, and that there is a great mental shock that the victims of the age of the Defendant did not agree with the victims and received.