Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio. According to the records of this case, the Defendant, who was sentenced to six months of imprisonment by the Seoul Southern District Court for the crime of interference with business, etc. on April 17, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 8, 2014. As such, the crime for which the judgment became final and conclusive are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the crime of this case are in a concurrent relationship under the latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and determine punishment after considering equity in cases where the judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal, and the following is again decided after oral argument.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting a crime and its evidence acknowledged by this court is as follows: “The defendant is a person who was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with labor at the Seoul Southern District Court on April 17, 2014 and the above judgment became final and conclusive on August 8, 2014 due to the crime of interference with business, etc.” in the first head of the lower judgment’s criminal facts constituting a crime; and “the criminal records in the column of the summary of the evidence” in the judgment of the lower court as stated in the corresponding column of the lower judgment, except for addition of the case search, judgment, and “the judgment”, and thus,

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act include: (a) the Defendant’s acknowledgement of the instant crime and reflects the instant crime; (b) the agreement with the victim; and (c) the equitable consideration in cases where the judgment became final and conclusive with the crime of interference with business; and