Defendant 1 and one other

Defendant

Disqualifications

Attorney Park Do-young

Suwon District Court Decision 2006 High Court Decision 2573 Decided January 26, 2007

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

The 73 days of detention before the pronouncement of judgment after filing an appeal shall be included in the sentence of the original judgment against Defendant 1.

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the Defendants is that each sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

In light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendants committed the instant crime by dividing their roles with the Nonindicted Party and organizing the instant crime; (b) in particular, Defendant 1 committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime due to the first head of the criminal facts as indicated in the judgment below; (c) the Defendants’ average sales amount per day is equivalent to KRW 48 million; (d) the Defendants’ total sales amount during the instant crime period reaches KRW 877,12 million; and (e) other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as indicated in the instant case, such as the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, consequence, etc. of the instant crime; and (e) the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the appeal by the defendants is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act because all of the appeals by the defendants are without merit, and the 73 days out of the detention days before the judgment is rendered after the appeal is filed in accordance with Article 57 of the Criminal Act shall be included in the punishment of the court below against the defendant 1 (in calculation, 83 days or less, and as recognized earlier, the sentencing of the court below which sentenced the above defendant to 10 months of imprisonment and fine of 5 million won shall not be unfair. Thus, the defendant filed an appeal. The grounds for appeal by the defendant are not appropriate, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Prehovah Sung (Presiding Judge)