The defendant shall be exempted from punishment.

2. The fact that the Defendant did not know even though he was under suspension of the execution due to the crime of attempted special robbery and again led to the instant crime is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime of this case and reflects his mistake, and that the victim also seeks the defendant's preference by agreement with the victim, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, various circumstances and equity between the final judgment and the final judgment, which are the sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed to be too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding columns of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime concerned, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. The latter part of Article 39(1) of the Exempted Criminal Act (the imposition of a separate punishment on the instant crime is deemed to be excessively harsh in light of the principle of equity in the case where a judgment is rendered simultaneously with the crime of injury which has become final and conclusive in favorable circumstances and judgment in the foregoing);