The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than five months.

1. The sentenced by the court below to the summary of the grounds for appeal (nine months of imprisonment) is unreasonable.

2. The judgment of this court changed from the date of the second trial to October 30, 2020, the application for changes in indictment made orally by the prosecutor (the first trial of this case is pending in the trial) to the “a sentence was rendered and the judgment was made conclusive on October 30, 2020,” and the applicable provisions of this Act added “Articles 37 and 39 of the Criminal Act” to the applicable provisions of this case.

However, according to the records of this case and the court, the crime of this case was committed before the judgment that the defendant was sentenced to one year from the Suwon District Court to a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) on April 21, 2020 became final and conclusive on October 30, 2020. However, the defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment with prison labor for special property damage, etc. in his/her own district court separately from the above criminal records, and the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (fence) which became final and conclusive on October 30, 2020 was committed before the judgment became final and conclusive on December 27, 2019, and thus the crime of this case which became final and conclusive on October 30, 2020 and the crime of this case could not be judged at the same time from the beginning.

Therefore, since the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. and the crime of this case, which became final and conclusive on October 30, 2020, cannot be established as concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act cannot be applied.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2018Do14863 Decided November 29, 2018 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Do14863, Nov. 29, 201). In addition, in a case where there is an illegal cause, the court that granted permission to amend an indictment may voluntarily revoke the said permission (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do116, Mar.

The crime of this case is not that the defendant inflicts an injury on other prisoners in the detention house during the period of repeated crime due to a special injury.

However, when the defendant is in the first instance, the victim is agreed with the victim.