The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. We examine ex officio the part of the instant facts charged that "the defendant tried to have the victim aboard a vehicle driven by a driver by a driver of a driving vehicle for returning home, but again refused to do so, the victim's face is taken twice again. The defendant continues to take twice the victim's face in a vehicle driven by a driver of a vehicle driven by a E, and the victim's face is taken by drinking within the vehicle while getting on board the vehicle driven by a driver of a vehicle, and the defendant taken out the vehicle on the side of the expressway and led the victim out of the expressway, and taken out the victim's face by drinking."

B. The act of assault, which was exercised as a means for confinement, does not constitute a separate crime of assault by absorbing into the crime of confinement (see Supreme Court Decision 82Do705 delivered on June 22, 1982).

Of the facts charged of this case, the part of the assault described in the above paragraph (A) is consistent with the part of the assault, which is the means of the crime of confinement, as indicated in the judgment of the court below, and according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is reasonable to deem that the assault was committed to maintain the means of confinement or to maintain the state of illegal confinement. Thus, the above assault is not incorporated into the crime of confinement as indicated in the judgment of the court below and does

(c)

Of the facts charged in this case, the part of assault as stated in the above paragraph A constitutes a crime, and the judgment of the court below convicting the above part is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to assault crime, which affected the conclusion of judgment.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

[Re-]