The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the punishment of eight months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and one hundred and twenty hours of probation, and one hundred and twenty hours of community service, which the court below sentenced, is unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the records of this case show that the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for two years, probation, three years of probation, community service, 160 hours of violent therapy, and 40 hours of violent therapy, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on December 28, 2013. Thus, the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapon, etc.) and obstruction of performance of official duties in the judgment of the court below are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, the court below's judgment cannot be maintained in this respect after considering equity in cases where judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act and considering mitigation or exemption of punishment.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed under Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's allegation of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the evidence and the criminal facts against the defendant recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are as follows: "The defendant added to the first head of the criminal facts to "two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, three years of probation, community service, 160 hours of probation, 40 hours of violent therapy, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on December 28, 2013," and except for the addition to "the judgment of Daejeon District Court 2013 Godan4095" to "the judgment of the Daejeon District Court 2013 Godan4095" to the summary of the evidence, it is identical to the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, it is as is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.