Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, the guilty part (excluding the dismissed part) and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed, respectively.

Defendant .

The first instance court dismissed the prosecution against the Defendant on the violation of the Labor Standards Act against B and C among the facts charged against the Defendant, and sentenced the Defendant guilty on the remaining facts charged.

In doing so, the prosecutor appealed only the guilty portion of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the prosecutor stated in the petition of appeal that the scope of appeal is “the entire judgment,” but only claims the illegality of sentencing as to the guilty portion on the grounds of appeal and did not state specific reasons for appeal as to the dismissed portion of the prosecution.

As to the dismissal part of a public prosecution, the dismissal part of the judgment of the court of first instance is separate from the dismissal part of the above public prosecution due to the failure of both the defendant and the prosecutor, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the judgment of the court of first instance which

2 The gist of the action in question

(a) The first original adjudication decision (for example, 6 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution) of the prosecutor (unfair sentencing) is too minor;

B. The 2nd judgment decision of the Defendant (unfair sentencing) is too heavy (the 4 months of imprisonment and the 2 year of suspended sentence).

3. As to the Defendant’s judgment ex officio, the first and second judgments of the lower court were rendered, and the Prosecutor appealed against the guilty part of the first judgment, and the Defendant filed each appeal against the second judgment of the lower court.

This Court decided to concurrently examine the above two appeals cases, and each of the offenses in the first and second judgments against the defendant is concurrent offenses under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus a single sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the convictions in the first and the second judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

4. The lower court’s conclusion is reversed on the grounds that the aforementioned reasons for reversal ex officio, and the conviction and the lower judgment of the first instance judgment are all reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without further proceeding to decide on each of the unlawful arguments of sentencing by a prosecutor and a defendant, and the following is again reversed after pleading.