공무집행방해등
All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for six months and fines for 1,500,000 won, and Defendant B shall be punished by fine for 500.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. (1) In the case of Defendant A’s 2013No3493, the lower court found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged in the instant case without having committed an act of obstructing the performance of official duties. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
(2) As to the punishment of unfair sentencing (Defendant A, Prosecutor) by the lower court (two months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution), the Defendant asserts that it is too unreasonable and unfair, and the prosecutor argues that it is too uneasible and unfair.
B. The judgment of the court below which found Defendant A guilty of the facts alleged in the case of No. 2013No3874 against the Defendants is not false, but is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the facts alleged in the case of No. 2013No3874.
(B) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 1,00,000) is too unreasonable.
(2) The prosecutor (Defendant B) found Defendant B not guilty of the facts charged against the above Defendant despite the awareness that the alleged facts in this case were false, and there was an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
C. (1) In the case of 2013No4004 against Defendant A, the Defendant and other investors of the Defendant and the other investors of the Defendant committed one person’s demonstration before Samsung Electronic Complex without communication, and even though this does not constitute an assembly, the judgment of the court below convicting Defendant A of the facts charged of the instant case and affected the conclusion of the judgment.
(2) The sentence of the lower court (a fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, each appeal case against Defendant A was consolidated with each other. Each of the lower judgment against Defendant A constitutes concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.