The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the period of three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The sentence of the lower court (one-year imprisonment) is too unreasonable as to the gist of the grounds for appeal.

2. The judgment organization has the characteristic of the systematic and continuous combination of many people who have committed a crime, and the crime committed by its members is much more scarcity and interviewed than ordinary crimes. For that reason, not only the direct victim of the crime but also the general public feel extreme anxiety and fear due to such crime, and is seriously dangerous in maintaining the legal order of the community and maintaining the well-being of the community. Thus, it is necessary to punish the defendant who joined the crime organization as a member of it in itself regardless of whether it actually and specifically causes damage to the general public.

The Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for committing a crime of special larceny, etc. and completed the execution of the sentence on January 30, 2012. In light of the fact that the Defendant joined the instant criminal organization immediately after the lapse of the repeated crime period following the execution of the above punishment, the nature of the crime is not good.

However, the defendant shows that all of the crimes of this case are recognized, and the period during which the defendant joined C, a criminal organization, actually, does not seem to be long, and at present, the defendant will not join the criminal organization in the future as a state of withdrawal.

The content of the instant crime is a brupt act committed by joining a criminal organization and taking a fluent act within an organization that is a part of its activities, and thus, it is somewhat weak that the punishment is imposed against general public other than the organization.

There is room to see.

The defendant's staff for a long time who is the victims of special violence do not want to punish the defendant.

B. The crime of this case committed by ASEAN is in the relation of larceny for which a judgment becomes final and conclusive and the concurrent crime of a group after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment should be determined at the same time in consideration of equity in the

. Other defendant.