The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., a fine of 5 million won) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor of the judgment, according to the records, the defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment on January 23, 2019 with labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court on the grounds of the violation of the Road Traffic Act. The above judgment was finalized on June 28, 2019. Since the crime of the judgment of the court below and the above violation of the Road Traffic Act, which became final and conclusive on June 28, 2019, are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a punishment for the crime of the judgment of the court below shall be imposed in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment of the court below is rendered at the same time in accordance with the former part

3. Accordingly, the court below's decision is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's allegation of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows after oral argument.

【The judgment of the court which has been held in multiple times] The summary of the facts constituting a crime and the evidence recognized by this court are all the criminal facts column. “The defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving on January 23, 2019) at the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court of the Daejeon District Court; the above judgment became final and conclusive on June 28, 2019; and the summary of the evidence was identical to each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below except for addition of reference materials to “1. previous conviction: August 30, 2019” in the summary of the evidence, and thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is the defendant.