The judgment below

The part concerning the first offense in the judgment is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul Western District Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 33(1) and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the court shall appoint a defense counsel ex officio in cases falling under any of the subparagraphs of paragraph (1). On the other hand, Article 33(3) provides that a defense counsel shall be appointed at the discretion of the defendant within the extent that does not go against the express will of the defendant, unless it falls under any of the subparagraphs of Article 33(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, unless it deems it necessary for protecting the rights of the defendant in consideration of the age, intelligence, level of education, etc. of the defendant, etc.

(2) According to the records, the Defendant was appointed as a public defender at the first instance court on August 14, 2013, and was detained on August 20, 2013; the Defendant and the public defender recognized all the facts charged on the first day of the first instance trial; after receiving the ruling on release on bail on October 15, 2013, the Defendant was tried without detention until the lower court; the first instance court sentenced the Defendant on August 28, 2013, the two years of suspended sentence in the second and third crimes in the second and third years of imprisonment with prison labor for the Defendant on November 28, 2013; and the Defendant continued to have been on the appeal of unfair sentencing by the public prosecutor on the grounds of unfair sentencing for the Defendant did not request or agree on the name of the victim in the name of KRW 30 million; and the Defendant did not request or agree on the designation of a public defender in the same type of crime as the instant case.