All of the first and second original judgments shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for twelve years.

Each philophoneopon No. 1 to.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. First Instance judgment: Defendant and Prosecutor’s Appeal 1) Defendant’s first instance judgment (one year of imprisonment with prison labor, eight years of confiscation, and one year of confiscation) are too unreasonable; 2) Defendant’s first instance judgment is too unreasonable.

B. Second original judgment: Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant did not know in advance that F and G import of phiphones into the Republic of Korea on December 13, 2018, and he became aware of F and G only after entry into the Republic of Korea. Therefore, the Defendant does not support the joint principal offender’s liability with respect to 5 km of phiphones imported by F and G. Nevertheless, the second original judgment that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged was erroneous by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles. (2) The Defendant’s imprisonment (eight years of imprisonment, additional collection) sentenced by the second instance court of unfair sentencing (an unjust collection) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the judgment of the defendant and prosecutor on the grounds for appeal following the consolidation of cases, prior to the judgment.

On the defendant, the first and second first and second judgments were pronounced successively, and the defendant and the prosecutor appealed on the second judgment, and only the defendant appealed on the second judgment.

This Court decided to consolidate the above two appeals cases.

However, since each crime of the first and second original judgments is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a single sentence should be sentenced in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the first and second original judgments are no longer maintained.

However, there are reasons for reversal ex officio as above.

Even if the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles on the second judgment of the court is still subject to the judgment of the court, we will examine the following provisions differently.

3. Judgment on the misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles by the defendant on the second judgment

A. The defendant of the second instance judgment and the second instance defense counsel are also at the second instance.