The part of the judgment of the court of first instance that interferes with the business of the defendant and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant .

1. Progression of litigation and scope of adjudication of this court;

A. The first instance court convicted the Defendant of interference with the business of the Defendant and the violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, and convicted the Defendant of both the 4 months of imprisonment and the 500,000 won of fine, and the second instance court convicted the Defendant of fraud, and convicted the Defendant of the 4 months of imprisonment, and filed each appeal against this.

B. After the court of first instance decided to hold a joint hearing of the court below 1 and 2, it reversed the part of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning the crime of interference with the defendant's business and the judgment of the court below 2, and sentenced the crime of interference with business and fraud under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and dismissed the defendant's appeal against the violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act among the judgment of the court of first instance.

The defendant appealed against this and filed an appeal on the grounds of violation of law and unfair sentencing.

(c)

The Supreme Court: (a) rendered a judgment after the lapse of the period for appeal against the second instance judgment and the second instance judgment, thereby giving the defendant an opportunity to submit a written reason for appeal; and (b) notified the national defense counsel of the receipt of the records of trial against the second instance judgment, thereby giving the national defense counsel an opportunity to prepare and submit a written reason for appeal within the prescribed period; (c) however, the defendant’s appeal against the second instance judgment is before the expiration of the period for submission; and (d) without notifying the national defense counsel of the receipt of the records of trial against the national defense counsel, the Supreme Court reversed the part of the judgment of the lower court prior to the remand, and remanded this part of the case to this court, and dismissed the defendant’s appeal against the part of the violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act.

(d)

Since the part of the judgment of the court below which violated the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance is separated from the dismissal judgment, the scope of the judgment of this court shall be the violation of the business of the defendant and the violation of Article 2.