A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not less than three years and two months.

Prosecutors' Office of Suwon District Prosecutors' Office in 2015.

A. Defendant 1) Although there was no fact that the Defendant committed the crime of selling logphones, obstructing the performance of special duties, obstructing the performance of official duties, or causing bodily injury in the judgment of the first instance court, the lower court found Defendant guilty of each of the above crimes by misunderstanding the facts.

B) The Defendant committed the crime of interference with the special performance of official duties, interference with the performance of official duties, and injury in the judgment of the first instance court.

Even if the defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to excessive use of philophones and drugs that remain in the body at the time, the court of first instance did not reduce the physical and mental weakness.

2) The sentence sentenced to the defendant (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for three years, confiscation, additional collection, and second instance: imprisonment with prison labor for six months) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court acquitted the Defendant on the injury caused by interference with the performance of special official duties among the facts charged in the instant case by misunderstanding the facts.

2) The sentence sentenced to the Defendant by the first instance judgment of the unfair sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The first instance court's judgment on the Defendant's ex officio determination was sentenced to three years of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection, and the second instance court's imprisonment with prison labor for six months, and the Defendant appealed the first and the second instance court's judgment on the first and the second instance court's judgment, and the prosecutor appealed each of the first instance court's appeal, and the second instance court decided to jointly deliberate on the above two appeals cases. The first and the second instance court's charges should be sentenced to a single principal punishment even if all of the charges of the first and the second instance court's charges are found guilty. In this respect, the first and the second judgment's judgment cannot be exempt from all reversal.

However, despite the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's assertion of mistake, mental or physical weakness, and prosecutor's mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined differently.

B. Defendant’s mistake of facts and assertion of mental and physical weakness