The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

1. The sentence (700,000 won) imposed by the lower court on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. According to the evidence duly examined by the court below ex officio, the defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment by the Seoul Central District Court on May 15, 2019 and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 30, 2019.

Since the crime of injury of this case is one of the concurrent crimes between each of the above crimes for which judgment has become final and conclusive and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, punishment shall be determined in consideration of equity and equality, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

On May 15, 2019, the first head of the lower court’s judgment on the summary of the evidence, “The Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for not less than ten months due to a crime of interference with the performance of official duties at the Seoul Central District Court on August 30, 2019.”

“A previous conviction in the judgment of Seoul Central District Court 2018 High Court 4765 High Court 2018 High Court 2018 High Court 2018 High Court 201, Supreme Court 2019No. 1512, etc., and a summary information inquiry of the case (final confirmation date)” are added to the summary of the evidence.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 257 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The Defendant again committed the instant crime of the same kind despite the fact that the sentencing under the proviso of Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which exempt the Defendant from bearing the costs of lawsuit under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, had a history of criminal punishment by committing a violent crime over several times.