The judgment below

Among them, parts against Defendant A, C, D, E, andO shall be reversed.

Defendant

A and C shall be sentenced to six months of imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of Defendant A, L, andO (Defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, 2 years of suspended execution, Defendant L, and O: Each fine of 1 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (1) of the lower court’s judgment on the allegation of unfair sentencing against Defendant A, C, D, E, G, H, and L (the aforementioned as above, Defendant C: imprisonment with prison labor for six months, suspended execution for two years, Defendant D: Fines for three million won; Defendant E, Defendant E, G, and H: Each fine for nine hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

(2) It is unreasonable that the court below did not confiscate evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 10 through 13, which was confiscated by the prosecutor's respective confiscation of Defendant A, C, D, and E from the above Defendants.

2. Judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing

A. Defendant A, including the circumstances properly explained by the lower court in its sentencing grounds, takes into account the sentencing conditions specified in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime. However, although the amount and frequency of the money and valuables provided by the Defendant to the representatives, the amount and money provided by the Defendant is against the Defendant, and the Defendant is without any criminal history, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court, and in full view of the fact that there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable, and thus,

B. Considering the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, as well as the circumstances properly explained by the lower court on the grounds of the sentencing, the sentencing conditions specified in the instant argument are considered. Furthermore, considering the fact that there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions in the trial compared with the lower court, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendants is too unjustifiable and unreasonable, and thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing against the Defendants is without merit.

C. Defendant E.