The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than four years and six months.

One (Evidence No. 1), kn. for seized keys.

1. Progress of litigation;

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of all of the facts charged in the instant case that the Defendant committed fraud, violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (special rape), and violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively deadly weapons, etc.), and violated the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Intimidation to a group), and found the Defendant guilty of all of the charges committed by carrying one knife and one knife, and one knife and one knife in violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Intrusion to a group of deadly weapons, etc.). The lower court acquitted the Defendant of all of the charges, on the ground that the Defendant invaded by carrying one knife and one knife, and one knife, one knife (No. 1), and one knife (No. 2), and one knife (No. 40 hours).

B. As to the lower judgment, the Defendant filed each appeal on the grounds of mistake of facts (not guilty part of the grounds) and illegality in sentencing on the grounds that the sentencing was unfair.

(c)

The trial prior to the remand dismissed each of the above appeals on the grounds that both the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor are groundless.

(d)

With respect to the judgment of the court before remanding, only the defendant filed an appeal on the grounds of misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles (the part concerning the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes) and misunderstanding of sentencing.

E. With respect to ① Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (special rape), the Supreme Court did not have any legitimate ground for appeal to the effect that the Defendant erred by mistake or misunderstanding the facts of the judgment before remanding the case where the Defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance and only asserted the unfair sentencing on the ground of appeal. Furthermore, there is no illegality as alleged in the grounds of appeal in the judgment of the court of first instance before remanding the case, but there is no violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.). As to the violation of the Act on Punishment of Violences, etc. (a collective weapon, etc.), the Constitutional Court rendered a judgment of