The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.

except that this judgment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below sentenced the Defendants to each punishment (the community service order of two years and 120 hours of probation in October, and the probation one year of probation in June) is unfair because it is too unfasible.

2. Determination

A. We examine the reasons for appeal against the defendant A by the public prosecutor ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

The court below held No. 2-D.

Article 79 Subparag. 13 and Article 53(1) of the current Automobile Management Act (a statutory penalty: imprisonment with prison labor for not more than three years or a fine not exceeding thirty million won) applies to the facts constituting an offense listed in the paragraph (a) (the fact that the defendant has conducted a registered automobile management business on July 4, 2015, and September 29, 2015).

However, Article 79 Subparag. 13 and Article 53(1) of the former Automobile Management Act (amended by Act No. 13686, Dec. 29, 2015; hereinafter the same) shall apply to the punishment provisions of the current Automobile Management Act (amended by Act No. 13686, Dec. 29, 2015; hereinafter the same) with respect to the above criminal facts committed before the enforcement of the said Act. In this regard, the lower court’s judgment on this part was no longer maintained.

Meanwhile, the court below held that the crime of this part and the remaining criminal facts are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

Since a single sentence has been imposed, the part of the judgment below against Defendant A should be reversed in its entirety.

B. As to the reasons for appeal against Defendant B by the prosecutor, there is no change of circumstances that could be considered in sentencing after the judgment of the court below, and compared with the sentencing conditions as indicated in the records and changes of this case and the reasons for sentencing of the court below, even considering the circumstances asserted by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal, the court below’s sentence against Defendant B is too unfeas

3. Accordingly, the part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A is reversed ex officio.