(b) Intrusion upon residence;

(c) Damage to property;

(d) Violence;

1. The absence of an expression of no punishment for a crime of non-violation of intention is a passive litigation condition and ex officio;

Since the facts are examined, even if the parties did not claim as grounds for appeal, the court below ex officio

Investigation and determination (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Do3172, Apr. 24, 2001).

Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act may be prosecuted against the clearly expressed will of the victim for the crime of assault.

Article 232 (3) and (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that no victim shall express his/her intent.

On the contrary, the decision of the court of first instance to withdraw the expression of intent to punish in a case which cannot be prosecuted.

section 23 of the Act provides that such action shall be brought before the

2. According to the records, the defendant's defense counsel E on October 24, 2017, before the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered.

any civil or criminal liability in connection with this case shall not be charged to the perpetrator after

(1) A written agreement under the name of the victim E and a certificate of the seal impression of the victim E

The fact that a written statement has been submitted to the first instance court is known.

3. Examining these facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the victim E is sentenced to the first instance judgment.

Since the court below withdrawn the defendant's previous wish to punish the defendant, the court below

In accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act, violence, which is a crime of non-competence among the facts

(2) The judgment of the court below was rendered. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found this part of the facts charged guilty.

In a decision, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the withdrawal of wishing to punish a crime of no punishment for an anti-competitive act.

The ground of appeal pointing this out is with merit.

4. The part of the judgment of the court below regarding violence must be reversed for the above reasons, and this part shall be reversed.

The reason is that there is a concurrent relationship between the remaining parts found guilty and Article 37 of the Criminal Code.

Since a sentence was sentenced, the judgment of the court below should be reversed in its entirety.

Therefore, without examining the remaining grounds of appeal, the judgment below is reversed, and the case is reversed.

The case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

It is decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Gin-young

Chief Justice Kim Jong-il

Justices Cho Jae-chul