The judgment below

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

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months and suspension of qualifications for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A and E (unfair sentencing) (one year of imprisonment and one year of suspension of qualifications) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing)’s sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (for Defendant A and E, two years of suspended sentence and suspension of qualification in October, and for Defendant D, two years of suspended sentence in August, and one year of suspended sentence in August, and one year of suspended qualification in case of Defendant D) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A provided co-offenders, such as funeral service providers, with information on the occurrence of defense accidents by monitoring the 119 small radio network of the Busan Fire Headquarters during the week.

Considering the fact that the instant crime was committed professionally and systematically, the legislative purport of the Communications Secret Protection Act, the role and duration of the Defendant A, etc., the liability for the instant crime is not less than that against the Defendant, and the fact that the Defendant A committed a second offense despite the history of criminal punishment being suspended once as a result of the same criminal act under the same law, which was disadvantageous to the Defendant A.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) Defendant A is a disabled person of the third degree due to the left-hand side cutting; (b) the investigative agency recognized all of the instant crimes from the investigative agency; (c) was engaged in a normal occupation in the future; (d) the gains acquired by Defendant A compared to other accomplices are relatively large compared to the other accomplices; and (e) equity with Defendant A, including I, for whom punishment has become final and conclusive, and other various sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the Defendant A’s age, sexual conduct, environment, circumstances after the instant crime, and the role in the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is somewhat inappropriate.

Therefore, the defendant A's improper assertion of sentencing is justified, and the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing against the defendant A is without merit.

B. Defendants C, D, E, C, D, and E shall be secured in preference to other competitors and shall be engaged in funeral business in collusion with I, Defendant A, etc., and the head of Busan fire headquarters.