The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

A. In relation to special intimidation against mistake of facts, the Defendant was only in the field of this case, since he was aware of whether there might occur son's work, such as having no reaction after she entered his house, and was divided into the door and the first class, and the motor boat's fuel was stored temporarily.

B. The lower court’s sentence on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

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

According to the records, the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months for the crime of assault and bodily injury by the Seoul Northern District Court on June 14, 2018 and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 22, 2018, and the defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for the crime of violating the Child Welfare Act (child abuse) in the same court on November 21, 2018, and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 30, 2019.

On the other hand, the crime of violation of the Child Welfare Act (child abuse) and the crime of special intimidation in the decision of the court below, which became final and conclusive after the judgment became final and conclusive, and the crime of violation of the Child Welfare Act (child abuse) in the decision of the court below was committed before the judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Ultimately, the crime of special intimidation against the defendant is a crime of violation of the Child Welfare Act (child abuse) and the crime of violation of the Child Welfare Act (child abuse) in the judgment of the court below, and the crime of violation of the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is a crime of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with regard to each crime in the judgment of the court below in accordance with Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act, and a punishment for each crime in the judgment of the court below shall be separately sentenced in consideration of equity

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the existence of such reasons for ex officio reversal.