A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and eight months.

Defendant

The punishment of each judgment of the court below (the first judgment: one year of imprisonment, and the second judgment: imprisonment with prison labor: eight months) is too unreasonable.

The sentence of the first instance judgment of the public prosecutor is too uneasible and unreasonable.

We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant and prosecutor prior to the judgment of ex officio.

This Court held two appeals cases against the defendant jointly and tried by the two original judgments, and since the crime in the decision of each original court is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment shall be sentenced in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the original judgment cannot be maintained any more.

Thus, the court below's decision is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's and prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by the court against the defendant is the same as the corresponding column of each judgment of the court below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 3 (1) and Article 260 (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 3 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act

1. Of concurrent crimes, the fact that the defendant's mistake in sentencing the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, Article 50, and the proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act is recognized, and that there is an agreement with the victim N and BD in the first instance.