A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

A. The punishment of Defendant 2’s decision on the judgment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is unreasonable as it is excessively unreasonable.

(b) The sentence of the first decision of the Prosecutor (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on each of the grounds for appeal.

The judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance rendered against the defendant, and the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court of second instance, and the court of first instance decided to jointly examine each of the above appeals cases.

Each crime of the first and second judgment against the accused shall be sentenced to one sentence in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

The judgment of the court below 1 and 2 cannot be maintained as it is.

3. The judgment of the court below against the defendant contains the above reasons for reversal ex officio.

In accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the judgment of each court below shall be reversed and the judgment below shall be ruled again as follows without any judgment on the unjust argument of sentencing by the defendant and the prosecutor on each judgment of the court below.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of the facts constituting an offense and the evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime, Articles 319 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes are all recognized. Each victim of the above two crimes is seeking action against the defendant by mutual consent with the defendant.

After the completion of the execution of imprisonment, the Defendant was living together with a person living together for five years, and responded to the protection observation during the period of attachment.

Such circumstances are factors that are favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of the 2017 No. 369 was committed.