All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable for the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”) to be sentenced to 12 million won.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles, the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, or erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, although the Defendant could have known false or exaggerated facts or have induced or traded consumers by using deceptive means.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined that the prosecutor’s mistake or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, led consumers to a false or exaggerated explanation, or purchased products.

It is insufficient to recognize that the defendant's sales of essential goods, etc. to consumers at low prices does not constitute soliciting or trading a consumer by using a deceptive method as prescribed by Article 11 (1) 2 of the Door-to-Door Sales Act, and the defendant found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Examining the judgment of the court below in a thorough comparison with the records, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor.

shall not be deemed to exist.

The prosecutor's above mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

B. In full view of the circumstances revealed by the lower court on the grounds of sentencing and all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing is determined to be reasonable by fully taking account of the various sentencing factors asserted by the Defendant and the Prosecutor, and is too heavy or too harsh.