The parts of the judgment of the first instance court against Defendant A and C and the judgment of the second instance shall be reversed, respectively.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

A (Case A) The Defendant did not know at all about the crime of fraud or extortion, and did not assist the Defendant. Of the criminal facts in violation of the Electronic Commerce Act, the part on the receipt of the means of access was connected to the parties to the transaction, and the Defendant did not directly acquire the means of access.

(M) In addition, each sentence of the original decision (No. 1: imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months, confiscation, and 2: imprisonment of 6 months) is too unreasonable.

(F) Defendant B (with respect to the judgment of the first instance court), Defendant B (with respect to the judgment of the first instance court), was unaware of the crime of fraud or extortion, and thus, did not assist in it.

(M) In addition, the sentence imposed by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

(F) Defendant C (with regard to the judgment of the first instance court), the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year and two months of imprisonment for a maximum term of one year and six months, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

D (in regard to the judgment of the first instance court), the punishment (one year and two months of imprisonment, confiscation) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Defendant

We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for reversal due to the consolidation of ex officio judgments on the appeal by A.

The court of the first instance decided to consolidate each appeal case against the original judgment.

However, since each of the judgments of the court below against the defendant is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one of these crimes must be sentenced in accordance with Article 38 of the Criminal Act in the event that it is combined and ruled simultaneously.

Therefore, the decision of the court below cannot be upheld as it is.

On the other hand, the prosecutor reversed the indictment due to the revision of the indictment, and in the trial of the court of first instance, applied for the amendment of the indictment with respect to the defendant as stated below, and since this court permitted it, the judgment of the court of first instance is also in this respect.