The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Sexual assault, 40 hours against the defendant.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. Defendant 1) In so doing, Defendant 1 agreed on August 23, 2020, the victim I of the crime of assault and the judgment of the court below prior to the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below, and Defendant 1 submitted a written application for non-prosecution of the above victim’s punishment to the court of the court of the court below prior to the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below. Thus, Defendant 2 of the judgment below’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment)

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal of ex officio, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for one year with prison labor for confinement, etc. at the Jeonju District Court on May 12, 2020, and on July 7, 2020, the above judgment became final and conclusive on July 7, 200. Since each of the of the crimes of this case is in a concurrent relationship with the crime of confinement, etc. for which the above judgment became final and conclusive, each of the crimes of this case is in a concurrent relationship with the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a punishment for each of the

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in omitting concurrent treatment under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code, and the judgment of the court below is not able to be maintained as it is.

3. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of misapprehension of legal principles

A. The crime of assault under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act is a crime of no prosecution against the victim’s express will under Article 260(3) of the same Act.

A declaration of wishing not to withdraw or punish an expression of wishing to punish in a crime of non-violation of will may be made before the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered (Article 232(1) and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act). Since the absence of an expression of wishing not to punish is a passive litigation condition and constitutes an ex officio investigation, the absence of an expression of intent not to punish should be investigated and determined ex officio even if

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2019Do10678, Dec. 13, 2019). B.

According to the records of this case, the defendant is the victim of assault on August 23, 2020 who is proceeding in the court below.