공갈미수
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.
The defendant does not pay the above fine.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.
2. According to the instant argument for ex officio determination, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. at the Seoul Southern District Court on July 26, 2013, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 11, 2013, and ② on March 14, 2014, the Seoul Southern District Court sentenced two months of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny and the said judgment became final and conclusive on March 22, 2014.
Therefore, since the above crimes and the crime of this case for which judgment has become final and conclusive are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, a punishment shall be determined after considering equity in cases where a judgment is concurrently rendered and examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment, the judgment of the court
3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds of ex officio reversal, and it is again decided as follows.
[C] The summary of the facts constituting the crime and the evidence of the defendant recognized by the court below is added to the first head of the facts constituting the crime of the court below, and the summary of the evidence is as follows: "The defendant is sentenced to imprisonment on July 26, 2013 with prison labor for larceny and two years and six months at the Seoul Southern District Court on July 26, 2013 and the above judgment became final and conclusive on October 11, 2013; ② on March 14, 2014, the Seoul Southern District Court sentenced two months of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny and two months at the Seoul Southern District Court on March 22, 2014, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on March 22, 2014." The summary of the evidence of the court below added "1. The defendant's statement at the court below was the same as the corresponding column of the court below's judgment on March 22,
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 352 and 350 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;
1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;
1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;