The judgment of the court below is reversed.

As to the obstruction of another’s exercise of rights among the facts stated in the judgment below, three months of imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) As to the obstruction of another’s exercise of right, the Defendant did not have concealed a motor vehicle and did not return it after having a motor vehicle. As such, Defendant 1 was not liable to the Defendant.

B) As to the sale of philophones on April 1, 2018, the Defendant did not sell philophones to P, but only purchased philophones from P along with D. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment, confiscation, additional collection KRW 2,568,00) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) Of the facts stated in the judgment below, the obstruction of the exercise of rights is a crime before and after the final judgment is made, and the remainder of the facts constituting the crime after the final judgment is made. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in holding a single sentence. 2) The above sentence of the judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. According to the record on the prosecutor’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles, the Defendant, at the Seoul Southern District Court on August 24, 2016, sentenced one year and six months to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., and the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 11, 2017. As such, the above crime and the obstruction of the exercise of rights among the criminal facts in the judgment of the lower court are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment should be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt the punishment by taking into account equity in cases where the said judgment is rendered simultaneously

Therefore, even though the court below should separate the above obstruction of the exercise of a right and the remaining crimes before the judgment becomes final and conclusive, it erred in imposing two punishments, and thus, the prosecutor's allegation in this part is with merit.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. As to the obstruction of one’s exercise of one’s right, the crime of obstruction of one’s exercise of one’s right under Article 323 of the Criminal Act is one’s own property