The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The sentence of the court below against the defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

In light of the language, legislative intent, etc. of the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, if a crime for which judgment has not yet become final and conclusive cannot be judged concurrently with a crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, it is reasonable to interpret that the relationship of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established and that the sentence shall not be imposed or mitigated or remitted in consideration of equity and equity in the concurrent judgment pursuant to

(2) In light of the records, perjury in this case is an offense of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Composition of Organizations, etc.), which was committed by the Defendant on October 27, 201 and on April 30, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2009Do9948, Oct. 27, 201; 2012Do9295, Sept. 27, 2012). The record reveals that the crime of perjury in this case was committed by the Defendant two years and three months imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) on September 19, 2014; 203 months after the suspended sentence of two years becomes final and conclusive on April 30, 2015; 203 years after the judgment became final and conclusive on July 26, 2013; 2013.

On the other hand, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the composition and activities of organizations, etc.) on April 24, 2015, and two years of suspended execution, and was sentenced to two years on May 2, 2015, and the above judgment became final and conclusive (the Busan District Court 2014Gohap88), but the crime for which the said judgment became final and conclusive also was committed before the final and conclusive judgment on December 27, 2013, and thus, committed the instant case.