Of the first and second original judgments, all parts against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A is the second instance.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing)

A. The punishment (the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and two months, and the second instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and the second instance court) that the lower court sentenced to Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment sentenced by Defendant C,O, and P second instance on the above Defendants (one year of imprisonment and additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the authority of Defendant A was rendered to Defendant A, and the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance were sentenced to each of the above two appeals cases, and this court rendered a decision to hold a joint trial on the two appeals cases. Each of the crimes except the crimes of the first judgment of Defendant A and the crimes of Article 2-1 (a) of the judgment of the second judgment of the court of second instance, among the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, shall be sentenced to one punishment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, among the first judgment and the second judgment of the court of second instance, the parts on the remaining crimes among the above crimes cannot be maintained as they are. 2) In addition, according to the records of this case, Defendant A was sentenced to one year imprisonment on July 13, 2017 with prison labor on the site of Suwon District Court, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on July 20, 2017.

(1) In relation to the crime under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment shall be determined after considering equity in the case of concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and examining whether to reduce or exempt the punishment accordingly. Therefore, the second judgment, which did not take into account, cannot be maintained any more in this respect.

B. Defendants C,O, and P’s assertion of unfair sentencing recognize and oppose all of the instant crimes, and Defendant C is an initial offender and her father.