The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant is sentenced to three months of imprisonment with prison labor for the case No. 2020 order710 of the judgment of the court below, and the court below's decision.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s imprisonment (10 months of imprisonment) against the Defendant (unfair imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The crime of paragraph (1) of the criminal facts stated in the judgment below is committed against the defendant on February 18, 2020 and the crime of causing property damage and the crime of causing property damage which became final on February 26, 2020 and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act requires two sentences, but it is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles that only one punishment is imposed.

2. The offense for which a judgment of imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment has become final and the offense committed before the final judgment has become final and conclusive regarding the grounds for appeal by a prosecutor falls under concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In this case, considering equity among concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act where a crime for which a judgment has not been rendered among concurrent crimes and a crime for which a final judgment has become final and conclusive under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, a sentence shall be imposed for such crime (the first sentence of Article 39(1) of the Criminal

According to the records, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months at the Seoul Northern District Court on February 18, 2020 for the crime of causing property damage and sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 years, and the judgment became final and conclusive on the 26th of the same month.

A sentence shall be imposed in consideration of equity between the above crime and the above crime pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to a concurrent crime under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the crime of destroying property and the crime of causing damage to property for which a judgment has become final and conclusive. The judgment of the court below which rendered a single sentence by deeming the crime as concurrent crimes and the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act should not be sentenced, even though the crime of Article 2020Kadan880 and the crime of Article 37 of the Criminal Act should be sentenced to each punishment. Thus, the judgment of the court below which rendered a single sentence by misunderstanding the legal principles as

This part of the appeal by the prosecutor is justified, and the court below has committed the above crimes.