The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the court of first instance, which maintained the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below is just in holding that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules and the presumption of innocence or by misapprehending the legal principles as to co-principal or presumption of innocence, among the modified facts charged in this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

On the other hand, in relation to concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive means the fact that there was a final and conclusive judgment on any crime among several independent crimes, and it is interpreted that the execution of a sentence is terminated, and whether the suspension of execution of a sentence is invalidated or not. Therefore, the sentence of a sentence by a final and conclusive judgment of suspended execution under Article 65

Even if the existence of a crime of final and conclusive judgment is not extinguished by it, it shall be deemed that the judgment under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act becomes final and conclusive.

(See Supreme Court Decision 84Mo1297 Decided August 21, 1984. The first instance court sentenced the defendant to a suspended sentence of three years on June 14, 2013 due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective weapon, injury by a deadly weapon, etc.) in the support of the Incheon District Court Branch of the Incheon District Court, which was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years and six months, and held on June 22, 2013 on the ground that the judgment became final and conclusive on June 22, 2013, crimes No. 1, No. 2, No. 2, Nos. 1 through 3, and No. 4, and the crime of which judgment became final and conclusive among crimes No. 3, the crime list No. 2, No. 4,9, among crimes No. 3