All the decisions of the first instance court are reversed.

The sentence against the accused shall be determined by a fine of 100,000 won.

The defendant above.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal each on the grounds of unfair sentencing

A. We examine ex officio the appeal cases of the first instance court and decide to jointly examine the appeal cases of the first instance court. Each of the above crimes which the first instance court found guilty of guilty is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and must be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the first instance court decisions against the defendant should be reversed due to such subsequent event.

B. According to the records, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties by this court on August 17, 2012 (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2012Da3564) and the above judgment became final and conclusive on October 12, 2012, and each of the instant crimes had been sentenced in consideration of the balance between the crime for which the above judgment became final and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and the case for which the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act were concurrent crimes. However, the first instance court decisions have been imposed on all of them, and thus, it cannot be maintained any further

3. According to the conclusion, there are grounds for reversal of the judgment of the first instance court. Accordingly, without examining the Defendant’s respective arguments on unfair sentencing, all of the decisions of the first instance court ex officio under Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act are reversed, and the following decisions are followed by oral arguments.

The summary of the facts of the crime and the evidence admitted by the court is as follows: ① The first head of the facts of the crime in the first instance judgment, i.e., “the defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for the obstruction of performance of official duties at the Seoul Central District Court on August 17, 2012, and the judgment became final and conclusive as it is,” and ② the summary of the evidence in the first instance judgment, i.e., “1.: the copy of each judgment and each statement on the results of the Konet case,” except for adding “each statement on the results of the search in the Konet case,” and thus, the first instance judgment is the same as those in the first instance judgment.