The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Sexual assault against the defendant for 40 hours.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the language, legislative intent, etc. of the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, where a crime not yet adjudicated could not be judged concurrently with a crime for which judgment became final and conclusive, it is reasonable to interpret that the relationship of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established, and that the sentence cannot be imposed or the sentence cannot be mitigated or exempted in consideration of equity and equity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do469, Mar. 27, 2014). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, in light of the records of the instant case, where the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence for six months in prison on May 22, 2014 by the ordinary military court of the Korea Veterans Association, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on May 30, 2014 (hereinafter “final and conclusive judgment”) and that the judgment was final and conclusive on May 21, 2015 (hereinafter “the above final and conclusive judgment”).

Therefore, the instant crime committed from March 27, 2015 to April 10, 2015, which was after the date of final and conclusive judgment No. 1, constitutes a case where a judgment could not be pronounced simultaneously with the crime of final and conclusive judgment No. 2 (the crime committed before the date of final and conclusive judgment No. 1), and thus, the instant crime is not in the relationship between the crime of final and conclusive judgment No. 2 and the crime of single concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, the lower court, in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, imposed a sentence on the instant crime at the same time with the crime of final and conclusive judgment under Article 39(1) in consideration of equity in cases where the instant crime is adjudicated simultaneously with the crime of final and conclusive judgment, and thus, cannot be maintained as it is ( Meanwhile, the Defendant is punished by imprisonment with labor for an indecent act, etc. committed by the District Court on November