beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
Reasons
1. Progress of litigation;
A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.) against the Defendant and sentenced the Defendant to two years of imprisonment, and appealed on the grounds that the Defendant was found to have committed an unfair sentencing.
B. Prior to the remand, the appellate court dismissed the Defendant’s appeal, and the Defendant appealed against this.
(c)
Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, which was enforced by Act No. 13718 on January 6, 2016, was deleted, and Article 258-2 (Special Bodily Injury) of the Criminal Act, which was enforced by Act No. 13719 on the same day, was newly established, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the court below that applied the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (amended by Act No. 13718, Jan. 6, 2016; hereinafter “former Punishment of Violences”) to the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (amended by Act No. 13718, Jan. 6, 2016; hereinafter “former Punishment of Violences”) on the grounds that Article 3(1)3 of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act cannot be aggravated by applying the same Act ex officio.
2. The summary of the grounds for appeal of the defendant (unfair sentencing) by the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
3. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by authority, the prosecutor examined the case ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by authority, and the prosecutor applied Article 3(1) and Article 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act to the defendant's "Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Act" as "Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Act," and the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained in this respect, since the subject of the judgment was changed by this court's permission.
4. If so, the judgment of the court below should be reversed ex officio.