The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the progress records of the case.

A. On June 4, 2010, the Defendant lodged an appeal after having been sentenced to three years of imprisonment (the prosecutor also appealed against the lower judgment) with prison labor on the grounds of the prosecutor’s modification of the indictment on October 8, 2010 (hereinafter “the judgment subject to a retrial”) and the Defendant’s final appeal was dismissed, and the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive on December 9, 2010 on the grounds that the lower judgment was reversed ex officio on the grounds of the prosecutor’s modification of indictment on October 8, 2010.

(c)

Articles 4(2)2, 3(1), and 2(1)1 of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (amended by Act No. 7891, Mar. 24, 2006; hereinafter the same shall apply) with respect to a crime of assault by carrying dangerous articles to maintain the existence of an organization among the objects subject to a judgment subject to a judgment, Article 4(2)2, 3(1), and 30 of the same Act were applied.

(d)

After that, on September 24, 2015, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that Article 3(1) of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning "a person who commits a crime under Article 260(1)(Assault) of the Criminal Act by carrying a deadly weapon or other dangerous articles is in violation of the Constitution."

E. On April 17, 2017, the Defendant filed a request for a new trial on the judgment subject to a new trial. On the grounds that there exist grounds for a new trial under Article 47(4) of the Constitutional Court Act in the part of the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc. of organizations, etc.) among the crimes subject to a new trial and the remaining criminal facts are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the Defendant decided to commence a new trial on

After that, there was no legitimate appeal within the appeal period, and the decision to commence the retrial became final and conclusive as it is.

2. Scope of the judgment of this court;

(a) concurrent crimes;