The judgment below

Of them, the guilty portion against Defendant B and the post office in the name of K in the name of the first of the net crime sight table (1).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. As to the violation of the Electronic Financial Transaction Act of the attached Table 1 and 6 of the indictment against Defendant B, the lower court: (a) committed the act of mediating the transfer of K’s account and M’s account access to the account in the name of K; (b) constituted a final judgment of the Seoul Northern District Court 2014 High Order 2687, 3885 (Joint) or constitutes an ordinary concurrent relation between the crime and the crime of the crime of the crime.

In addition, acquittal was pronounced.

However, because the account number is different, it does not constitute the same criminal facts, or it does not constitute several results due to the same act of the defendant by different dates.

In this part of the judgment of the court below, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, or incomplete deliberation.

(2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to Defendant B is too uneasible and unfair.

(c)

Defendant

In the case of B, after Defendant B filed an appeal against the lower judgment on November 13, 2015, Defendant B received notice of receipt of the record of the case of appeal from this court on December 11, 2015, Defendant B submitted a written reason for appeal on August 1, 2016, which was the period for submission of the written reason for appeal under Article 361-3(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and did not indicate the reasons for appeal in the petition of appeal.

Although the reasons for appeal that have been submitted later are alleged to be unfair in sentencing, such grounds for appeal are not relevant to law.

2. Determination:

A. There is no significant change in circumstances to consider Defendant’s sentencing after the judgment of the court below on Defendant A’s assertion.

In light of the facts alleged by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair, even if all of the circumstances alleged by the Defendant are considered as grounds of appeal.

Therefore, it is true.