A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

2. Considering that the nature of the instant crime is not good, and that the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he had the same criminal record, strict punishment against the Defendant is necessary.

However, it is recognized that the punishment of the court below is too unreasonable in consideration of the conditions of sentencing specified in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstance after the crime, etc., as it is recognized that the punishment of the court below is too unreasonable, since the defendant's above assertion is too unreasonable, since it is recognized that the defendant's punishment of this case is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is ruled again as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 231 of the Criminal Act; Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act; Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act; and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. The first sentence of Article 37 of the Criminal Act to treat concurrent crimes: Provided, That the first sentence of Article 39 (1) shall be applicable;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;