Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and had no or weak ability to discern things and make decisions.

B. The lower court’s sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (1.5 million won of a fine) imposed on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the record reveals that the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul Southern District Court on October 9, 2012 due to the crime of interference with business, etc., and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 8, 2012. The above crime of interference with business, etc., for which the judgment became final and conclusive, in relation to the crime of interference with business, etc., and the crime of injury in this case, in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, should be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. However, the judgment below

However, the defendant's argument about mental disorder is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal.

B. In full view of all the circumstances, such as the means and method of the instant crime, the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., which were revealed in the record of judgment on the assertion of mental and physical disorder, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, did not have or lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions. Therefore,

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows after oral argument.

Criminal facts

this Court recognizes the substance of the evidence and the summary thereof.