상해등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for the first and second crimes in the judgment of the 2014 Highest3549.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for not less than four months (the first crime, second crime, third-party A, second-party B), imprisonment for not less than ten months (the crime of 2014 high-ranking 1593), second-party B, third-party C, and fourth-party A) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the first offense of the case in the 2014 Highest 3549, the second offense of the case in the 2014 Highest 3549, the second offense of the case in the 2014 Highest 3549 was committed on August 13, 2013 when the judgment on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Doing Vehicles) became final and conclusive on or after September 13, 2013, and the second offense of the case in the 2014 Highest 3549 is not related to the second offense in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and is not related to the second offense in the 2014 Highest 1593 case, and the second offense in the 2014 Highest 1593 case, the second offense in the 2014 Highest 3549 case, and the second offense in the 3
Nevertheless, the lower court determined that the crime was concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act with the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc., for which the judgment became final and conclusive, and that the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act was concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Furthermore, the lower court determined that the crime was concurrent crimes under Article 3-A and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc., for which the judgment became final and conclusive, and that the crime was committed at the same time under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and that the crime was committed under Article 2-B, Article 3-3 and Article 3-49 of the Act and Article 2-2-B, Article 3-49 of the former part of the Act
3. Accordingly, the court below's decision on the ground of ex officio reversal is without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing. The court below's decision under Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.