According to the records, the Re-Appellant was sentenced to the suspension of sentence for one year of imprisonment for fraud at the original branch of the Chuncheon District Court on August 17, 2004 and the above judgment became final and conclusive on February 24, 2005, and the Re-Appellant was sentenced to the suspension of sentence for ten years of imprisonment with prison labor at the original branch of the Chuncheon District Court on April 19, 2005, and was sentenced to the suspension of the sentence for ten years of imprisonment with prison labor at the original branch of the Chuncheon District Court on October 28, 2005, and this judgment became final and conclusive on October 28, 2005; the prosecutor was sentenced to the suspension of sentence on November 13, 2006 on the ground that the Re-Appellant was finally sentenced to the suspension of sentence for more than the suspension of qualification and accordingly, the first instance court dismissed the Re-Appellant's immediate appeal on December 6, 2006, and the lower court was justifiable.

However, according to Articles 60 and 61(1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 335 and 336(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, where a person who has received a suspended sentence becomes final and conclusive by a public prosecutor’s request during the period of suspension of qualification or more severe punishment, the suspended sentence will only be invalidated upon a public prosecutor’s request for the invalidation of suspended sentence. In addition, when two years have elapsed after the judgment of suspended sentence became final and conclusive, the suspended sentence shall be deemed acquitted as prescribed in Article 60 of the Criminal Act. Since there is no judgment of suspended sentence after the period of suspension expires, the decision of suspended sentence shall not be made to invalidate the suspended sentence (decision of suspended suspended sentence) since there is no judgment of suspended sentence (decision of suspended suspended sentence) after the judgment of suspended sentence becomes final and conclusive. The same applies to an immediate appeal or reappeal which has the effect of suspending the execution as to the original decision, and even if the period of suspension has expired

Therefore, in this case where the decision of invalidation of the suspension of the first instance against the Re-Appellant had already been in a state of not effective due to the Re-Appellant's immediate appeal, and it is apparent that the grace period for the Re-Appellant had already been expired before the order of the court below, the above defendant's case for which the Re-Appellant was sentenced to the suspension of the sentence had already been acquitted, and there was no judgment of suspension of the suspension of invalidation. Accordingly, the court below cancelled the first instance decision and dismissed the Re-Appellant's immediate appeal even though it had dismissed the prosecutor's claim for invalidation of the suspension of the sentence of this case. Thus, the court below's order erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to invalidation of

Therefore, the order of the court below is reversed, and this case is sufficient to be tried by the court, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench. The decision of the court below is revoked, and the claim of this case is dismissed.

Justices Kim Ji-hyung (Presiding Justice)