All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles, Defendant A1 was sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million for a crime that constitutes a single crime, which is a single crime with the instant facts charged, and thus, the effect of the final summary order extends to the facts charged in the instant case, which is a single comprehensive crime.

The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles as to comprehensive crimes, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of the execution of two years, and the community service order of two hundred hours) is too unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

H1) In fact, the Defendant did not commit the instant crime in collusion with Defendant A, upon receiving a request from the former owner of the vehicle to transfer only the name from the former owner of the vehicle, thereby introducing Defendant A by introducing the company, and did not receive any profit from the instant crime.

In light of the degree of participation in crime, the amount of profit acquired, etc., the defendant is only responsible for the act of false entry, such as electronic records, etc., and is also liable as a joint principal offender.

shall not be required to do so.

The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court (the sentence of two years of suspended execution in April, and the community service order of 100 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment 1 on Defendant A’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine

that is a single comprehensive crime.

shall not be deemed to exist.

The res judicata effect of a final summary order extends to the facts charged in this case.