The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The lower court’s sentence (3 million won in penalty) against the Defendant as to the summary of the grounds for appeal is deemed unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the reasons for ex officio appeal prior to the determination of the reasons for appeal.

According to the records of this case, the Defendant was sentenced to three months of imprisonment with labor for interference with business by the Seoul Northern District Court on November 1, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 3, 2018. As such, the crime of interference with business already established and the crime of this case constitutes concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act determines punishment after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment is rendered at the same time pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. In this respect, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any longer.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the following is again decided after pleading.

[Judgment in its entirety] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by this court is subject to Article 1 of the lower judgment’s sentence, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 3, 2018, on November 1, 2017, by having been sentenced to three months for obstruction of business by the Seoul Northern District Court as a result of obstruction of business.

“A previous conviction in the judgment: ...... See Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Criminal Procedure Act shall be cited as it is, in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act, in addition to adding “A previous conviction in the judgment: a significant fact to this court.”

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Subsequent to Article 37 of the Criminal Act concerning the treatment of concurrent crimes: Provided, That Article 39 (1) (limited to interference with the affairs for which the above crime and judgment have become final and conclusive);

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

1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the Criminal Procedure of the Provisional Payment Order is twice the sentence to the defendant for the same offense and one suspended sentence.