A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

The facts of the Defendant’s previous conviction, which is the reason for the aggravation of repeated crimes, do not constitute criminal facts but merely constitute sentencing, and even if the indictment does not contain a provision that applies to the aggravation of repeated crimes, the court may ex officio punish the Defendant as a repeated offense (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do6147, Jul. 9, 2015). According to the records in this case, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for six months at the Incheon District Court on July 4, 2012 and the above judgment became final on the 12th of the same month, and the Defendant was sentenced to a prison term of four months on October 26, 2012 by interfering with the performance of official duties at the Incheon District Court on March 13, 2013, and thus, the suspended sentence became invalidated by the said Defendant’s execution of the detention house in Seoul on December 16, 2014.

According to the above facts, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on repeated crime, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment, even though the punishment should be imposed within the scope of the aggravated punishment for repeated crime under Article 35 of the Criminal Act for each of the criminal facts of this case.

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 unfair assertion of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the judgment of the court below and the summary of evidence "The defendant is at the Incheon District Court on July 4, 2012.