The summary appeal is dismissed.

The brief grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

In light of the legislative intent and form of Article 5-4(5)1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “instant provision”), which was amended by Act No. 13717, Jan. 6, 2016, and the differences between Article 35 and Article 35 of the Criminal Act, the provision of this case should be interpreted as creating a new element of a crime that is heavier than the Criminal Act if a person who has been sentenced to imprisonment more than three times for committing a crime under Articles 329 through 331 of the Criminal Act, separate from the provision of a repeated crime under Article 35 of the Criminal Act, commits a crime under Article 329 through 331 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the punishment for a repeated crime should be determined within the scope of the severe punishment imposed pursuant to Article 35 of the Criminal Act, once the punishment prescribed by the Act of this case.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2019Do18947 Decided May 14, 2020). For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the instant facts charged, and sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor for a year and two months, followed by re-aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes provided for in Article 5-4(5)1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, it cannot be deemed that there was an error in the application of statutes, as alleged in the grounds of final appeal.

According to Article 372 of the Criminal Procedure Act, a non-permanent appeal may be filed when the facts recognized by the judgment of the court of first instance are not applicable, when there is an error in the application of statutes, or when a punishment is repealed, modified or pardoned after the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered.

The term "when there is an error in the application of the law" refers to a case where the application of the law is erroneous on the premise that the judgment of the court of first instance is recognized.

Supreme Court Decision 2006Do9338 Decided March 15, 2007