The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment of 10 months, Defendant B, and F are punished by imprisonment of 6 months, Defendant C, and D, respectively.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the case where the Defendants filed a formal trial against the summary order, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine by misapprehending the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration, which sentenced to more severe punishment than the summary order in the instant case where the prosecutor also demanded formal trial.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (Defendant A: imprisonment of one year, fine of 75 million won, Defendant B, and F: imprisonment of six months, with prison labor of two years, fine of 10 million won, community service, 240 hours, Defendant C, and D: each fine of five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The principle of prohibition of disadvantageous change in judgment on the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles is to guarantee the defendant's right to appeal or the right to claim a formal trial against a summary order, and in the case of a higher court or a formal trial appeal filed only for the defendant or the defendant, the court shall not render a sentence heavier than that already sentenced or notified to the same criminal facts.

(Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6784 Delivered on November 11, 2004). Meanwhile, not only the defendant but also the public prosecutor may make a request for formal trial within seven days from the date of receipt of notification of the summary order.

(1) According to the records, the court below’s order of Jinwon District Court issued a summary order on November 27, 2013 with approximately KRW 3733, respectively; Defendant B, C, and F issued the summary order on December 9, 2013; Defendant D received each of the above summary order on December 6, 2013; and both Defendants filed a request for formal trial on the ground of unfair sentencing on December 11, 2013; and even the prosecutor who received a certified copy of the above summary order on December 6, 2013 also filed a request for formal trial on December 13, 2013.

As long as not only the Defendants but also the public prosecutor demanded a lawful formal trial against the above summary order, the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration applicable to the higher court or the case of formal trial appealed only for the Defendants is not applicable.