The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the instant crime committed by the Defendant and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “the first final judgment”) on July 11, 2018, there were concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the court below rendered a sentence against the Defendant by deeming that the final judgment (hereinafter “the second final judgment”) on May 3, 2019 and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “the second final judgment”) constituted ex post concurrent crimes.

Therefore, the lower court’s judgment is unlawful by failing to take into account the equity in the case where the instant crime and the first final judgment are concurrently adjudicated.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (four months of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. In the case of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act regarding the defendant's assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles, the crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive means the fact that there was a final judgment on any of several independent crimes, and the interpretation that whether suspension of execution of sentence for a crime for which final and conclusive judgment

(See Supreme Court Decision 84Mo1297 Decided August 21, 1984. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for six months in the Jeju District Court on February 13, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 11, 2018 (the final and conclusive judgment), and on August 16, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor on January 7, 2019 and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 3, 2019 (the final and conclusive judgment).

The crime of this case is obvious that it was committed prior to the date of final judgment of the first final judgment, and according to the legal principles as seen earlier, the suspension of execution of the sentence was invalidated due to the final judgment of the second final judgment after the final judgment of this case.

Even if the crime of this case and the first final judgment are committed, the crime of this case is committed.