All of the appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants and Defendant B are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s respective sentences (the KRW 3 million of the Defendant A’s fine, the KRW 8 months of the suspended execution, and the two years of the suspended execution) against the Defendants of the public prosecutor are deemed unreasonable.

B. The Defendant B’s sentence is too unreasonable.

2. Determination of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of the first instance court that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of directness taken by our Criminal Procedure Act and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, it is reasonable to reverse the unfair judgment of the first instance court only in cases where it is deemed that the judgment of the first instance court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing in the course of the first instance sentencing review and the sentencing criteria, etc., or where it is deemed unfair to maintain the first instance sentencing as it is in full view of the materials newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing review.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in the absence of such exceptional circumstances.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined a punishment within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account all the circumstances regarding the Defendants’ sentencing into account, and considering the circumstances in which both a prosecutor and Defendant B asserted as the grounds for appeal, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is too complicated.

It is not recognized that the sentence of the court below against Defendant B is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing and Defendant B's assertion of unfair sentencing are without merit.

3. Accordingly, the Prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendants and the Defendant B’s appeal are without merit.