The judgment below

Of the guilty parts against Defendant A and the innocent parts, each of the fraud points and Defendant B.

1. Of the acquittal portion of the lower judgment against Defendant A, the lower court acquitted Defendant A of all of the charges of violation of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Network Utilization and Information Protection (hereinafter “Information and Communications Network Act”) and the charges of violation of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Network Utilization and Information Protection (information and Communications Network Infringement, etc.), which are the facts charged alternatively changed to Defendant A. The lower court acquitted Defendant A of all of the charges of violation of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc.). The prosecutor did not appeal to the acquittal portion of violation of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (information and Communications Network Infringement, etc.) and appealed only for violation of the Act on Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Network Utilization and Information Protection (information and Communications Network Infringement, etc.). As such, the scope of this court’s trial as to the aforementioned selective charge

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants A (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles) with regard to the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act in the guilty part of the judgment below, a series of acts related to the claim for the worker's disaster insurance money by the defendant is merely a mere mechanical act and thus does not fall under Article 109 (1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act. Furthermore, it constitutes a legitimate act as stipulated in Article 20 of the Criminal Act, since it constitutes a business included in the legitimate scope of duties

(2) Regarding the violation of the Certified Public Labor Attorney Act among the convictions of the court below, there is no fact that the defendant has induced the request for the case by improper means, such as requesting a patient presentation to theO, etc., and there is no evidence to acknowledge the request.

B. The Defendants guilty in the lower judgment.