폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등폭행)등
The judgment below
The remainder, excluding the dismissed part, shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
1. The lower court sentenced the judgment dismissing the prosecution regarding the assault among the facts charged in the instant case, and sentenced the Defendant to eight months of imprisonment, etc. on the grounds of unfair sentencing. The prosecutor appealed against the lower court on July 22, 2016. The Defendant also filed an appeal against the lower court on July 22, 2016. However, even if the Defendant was notified of the notification of the receipt of the trial records from the lower court on August 25, 2018, the Defendant did not submit the statement of grounds for appeal within 20 days from the date when the notification of the notification of the receipt of the trial records was submitted, and the petition of appeal does not contain any reasons for appeal.
The phrase “the scope of appeal” of the prosecutor’s petition of appeal refers to “the entire amount,” but so long as the prosecutor’s ground of appeal is obviously unreasonable as to the guilty portion, even if the prosecutor’s appeal is accepted, the result does not affect the rejection portion of the judgment below, and thus, the aforementioned rejection portion is excluded from the object of adjudication by this court by being excluded from and decided upon the prosecutor’s appeal.
Therefore, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the above guilty part of the judgment below.
2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (public prosecutor) that the court below imposed on the defendant is too unhued and unfair.
3. According to the records of ex officio determination, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of four months for the crime of interference with business at the Busan District Court on November 19, 2015, which was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for the crime of interference with business at the Busan District Court on August 20, 2016, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on August 20, 2016. The above crime of interference with business against the Defendant and the crime of interference with business, which became final and conclusive on August 20, 2016, are concurrent crimes under the latter part