Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 80,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. The Defendant, by mistake of fact, did not cause apprehensions or harm to neighbors.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 80,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on September 30, 2015, the lower court fully recognized the fact that the Defendant obstructed the front of and uneasyed a passenger car boarding the victim E on September 30, 2015, and that the Defendant was in front of the front apartment of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu on July 7, 2015.

B. Upon ex officio determination, the records show that the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment with prison labor for an assault at the Seoul Eastern District Court on December 30, 2015, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on March 18, 2016. As such, the crime for which the said judgment became final and conclusive and the crime of the lower judgment in relation to concurrent crimes by a group after Article 37 of the Criminal Act are in the relation of concurrent crimes by a group after the judgment is rendered at the same time in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. The lower court’s judgment was omitted and thus it becomes impossible to maintain it as it is.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing, on the grounds that the court below's judgment is reversed ex officio, and the following judgment is rendered after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by the court are as follows. The defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul Eastern District Court on December 30, 2015 and the above judgment was finalized on March 18, 2016.

“1. A previous conviction in the judgment of the court below” is added to “1. A criminal history inquiry” in the summary of the evidence, and it is identical to the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act and Article 3 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act: