The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the progress records of the case.

A. On September 18, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years in October 10 to imprisonment with prison labor due to a crime of breach of trust in the Incheon District Court 2013 High Court 5027, 5861 (a consolidation), etc. The Defendant appealed from the prosecutor and was sentenced to a judgment to reverse the lower judgment in the Incheon District Court 2014No 3380 and to be sentenced to six months imprisonment with prison labor (hereinafter “determination subject to a retrial”) on February 5, 2015, and the Defendant appealed to the Supreme Court 2015Do3258, but the appeal was dismissed on April 10, 2015, and the said judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive.

B. On September 24, 2015, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality as to Article 3(1) of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (amended by Act No. 12896, Dec. 30, 2014) regarding “a person who committed a crime under Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act by carrying a deadly weapon or other dangerous articles.”

(c)

On January 27, 2016, the Defendant filed a petition for a new trial on the judgment subject to a new trial. On February 12, 2016, this court rendered a decision to commence a new trial on the whole of the instant judgment subject to new trial on the grounds that the criminal facts of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapons, etc.) among the judgment subject to new trial were due to re-examination under Article 47(4) of the Constitutional Court Act, and that the criminal facts, which were due to the re-examination, and the remaining criminal facts, are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the decision

2. The lower court’s sentence (one hundred months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) against the Defendant as to the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is unreasonable as it is too uneasible.

3. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor ex officio.

A. An ex officio decision-making prosecutor due to a change in the subject of adjudication is among the crimes against the defendant in the trial after the commencement of the retrial.