The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (for defendant A, six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and fine of five million won) of the lower court is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination:

A. In light of the fact that sentencing of the relevant legal principles is based on statutory penalty, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and appropriate scope, and the fact that the court of first instance has discretion based on the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing in a case where there is no change in the conditions for sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the enhancement of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the first instance court’s sentencing falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the court of first instance and impose a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the ground that

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). B.

Defendant

The part of the lower court against A determined the Defendant by taking into account all favorable or unfavorable sentencing conditions and other circumstances prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, and there is no special change in the sentencing conditions that would vary from the lower court’s sentence, and even considering all of the sentencing grounds stated by the lower court, it is not recognized that the lower court’s sentencing with respect to the Defendant exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because the sentencing of the Defendant is too unfeasible.

Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

C. The part of the lower court against Defendant B determined the sentence against the Defendant in full view of the sentencing conditions favorable or unfavorable to the Defendant and other circumstances provided for in Article 51 of the Criminal Act. In so doing, there is no special change in the sentencing conditions that may vary from the lower court’s sentence in the final trial.

In addition, the sentence of a fine of five million won imposed by the court below against the defendant is the highest range of the recommended sentencing criteria, and the records of this case are recorded.