The judgment below

Part of acquittal shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that from the date of this judgment.

1. Where there exist several orders for the judgment, such as partial conviction, partial acquittal, etc., on a case prosecuted concurrently for concurrent crimes within the scope of the trial at the court below, the part included in the one part may be separately appealed from other parts, and the part not appealed by both parties becomes final and conclusive. Thus, where only the prosecutor appealed on the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, which pronounced not guilty or not guilty, as to the part of the concurrent crimes, only the prosecutor appealed on the part of the judgment of first instance, the part of the judgment of conviction which was not appealed by the defendant and the prosecutor became final and conclusive as the period for appeal has expired, is not only the part of the judgment of innocence,

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 91Do1402 delivered on January 21, 1992). According to the records, the court below found the defendant guilty of the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a deadly weapon, etc.) and the damage to property among the facts charged against the defendant, and found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged against the present main building and fire damage. Since only the prosecutor appealed the part of the above innocence, and the guilty part against the defendant is confirmed, the scope of the trial court's judgment is limited to

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) from around 2001 to the victim E, the Defendant was at any time at the time living together with the victim in around 2006, and even during the living together with the victim in around 2006, there was a bullying to find the victim from time to time; (b) around 2007, the victim was injured by the accident causing approximately two weeks of medical treatment; and (c) before the victim committed the instant crime, the victim was deprived of his own will worth KRW 6 million owned by the victim; and (d) at the time, the victim was at any disadvantage with the victim, at the time, at the time, the victim was removed from the victim’s father and male-child room.