The judgment below

Part on the third crime in the judgment shall be reversed.

Punishment for the crime No. 3 in the judgment of the defendant shall be imposed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for crimes No. 1 and 2 in the original judgment, three months of imprisonment with prison labor for crimes No. 3 in the original judgment, confiscation, and collection) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the argument about the first and second crimes in the holding, it is favorable for the defendant to recognize and reflect his mistake properly.

On the other hand, the defendant's scopon acceptance, medication, and possession of scopon are not only to avoid the body and mind of an individual due to scoponism, toxicity, and radio wave, but also to undermine the public safety and to create related crimes, which are highly harmful to society. The defendant is disadvantageous to the defendant, who received scopon from the day after he was released after being sentenced to imprisonment for a period of eight months on March 29, 2016 due to the same scopon receipt, medication, and the crime of medication.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading to the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, etc., it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court on the first and second crimes is too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.

B. Determination as to the argument about the crime No. 3 in the holding (1) We examine the defendant's grounds for appeal ex officio prior to the judgment.

(2) According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the following facts can be acknowledged.

(A) On April 21, 2016, the Defendant appeared at the Gwangju District Court 2016 High Court 2016 High Court 180, as a witness of the violation of the Meritorious Management Act, and convicted him/her of the facts constituting a crime. The above court rendered a judgment not guilty of J on April 21, 2016.

(B) On June 22, 2016, the Defendant led to confession of perjury by the prosecution. (3) On June 22, 2016, the Defendant led to confession of perjury by the prosecution.

(C) Evidence No. 2656, 7 pages). (C)