All the judgment below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for three and a half years, and by imprisonment for two years.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., both types);

A. The Defendants (as to the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance)’s punishment (as to the judgment of the court of first instance, 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment, 2 years of imprisonment and 2 years of confiscation, 2 years of confiscation, 3 months of imprisonment of the court of second instance and 3 months of imprisonment of the court of second instance) are too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor (the first instance judgment: Defendant A’s imprisonment, 3 years and 6 months, Defendant B’s imprisonment, and 2 years and confiscation) of the lower court’s punishment (the first instance judgment: Defendant A’s imprisonment) is deemed to be too unhued and thus unfair.

2. We examine ex officio the judgment of the Defendants and the Prosecutor on the grounds for appeal.

After the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance regarding the Defendants, the Defendants and the Prosecutor filed each appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance, and this court decided to consolidate the two appeals cases.

Since the first and second judgments against the Defendants are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, each sentence should be imposed on the Defendants in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the first and second judgment cannot be maintained as it is.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendants and the prosecutor's allegation of unfair sentencing, and the judgment of the court below and the judgment of the court below are all reversed, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by this court is identical to the description of the judgment of the court of first and second in addition to changing “the defendant’s partial statement” in the summary of the evidence in the judgment of the court of first instance to “the defendant’s legal statement”, and thus, it is also cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Defendants of the pertinent Act on criminal facts: Articles 49(4)1 and 6(3)1 and 6(3)1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act.