The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In addition, each of the instant crimes committed by the misapprehension of the legal principles was investigated by an investigative agency together with each of the instant aiding and abetting of fraud (this Court Decision 2017No751, hereinafter “the final and conclusive aiding and abetting of Fraud”) which was indicted prior to the indictment, and was tried in a single trial proceeding as well as similar to the content of the crime.

of the corporation.

Nevertheless, the prosecutor's negligence or illegal omission of the person in charge separated only each of the crimes of this case from a separate case, and then the prosecution was made late constitutes abuse of the right of prosecution.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the prosecutor voluntarily exercised his/her authority to institute a prosecution and gave substantial disadvantage to the defendant.

In a case where it appears to be an abuse of the right to institute a public prosecution, the effect of the indictment can be denied in view of the abuse of the right to institute a public prosecution. Here, a person's intention to institute a public prosecution is not sufficient merely by negligence in the course of performing his duties, and at least dolusent intent is required (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Do3026, Sept. 7, 2001, etc.). The prosecutor brought a lawsuit to divide the prosecution into several times according to the progress of the investigation without instituting multiple criminal acts of the defendant together

the prosecutor's filing of the prosecution significantly deviates from the discretion of the prosecution.

It cannot be seen (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do5313, Dec. 27, 2007). According to the records of this case, each of the crimes of this case was instituted later than the established fraud aiding and abetting case. However, compared to each of the crimes of this case, the crime of this case was used by Bosphishing organization for the purpose of receiving the amount of damage from the victims.