The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul Western District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Since the effect of an indictment in a single comprehensive crime is limited to the whole of the crimes recognized as identical to the facts charged, in a case where the facts charged are additionally discovered during the public trial, a public prosecutor may add such facts to the facts charged by the procedures for modification of an indictment.

However, in a case where a final and conclusive judgment of conviction for another crime recognized as identical to the facts charged is rendered between the facts charged as charged and the facts charged additionally, the facts charged after the additional final and conclusive judgment are divided into the facts charged and separate crimes without identity.

Therefore, the prosecutor cannot add the facts constituting an offense after the final and conclusive judgment as the facts charged pursuant to the amendment procedures, and must institute a public prosecution as a separate independent crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 9Do2744, Mar. 10, 200; 2000Do1411, Jun. 9, 200). 2. The record reveals the following facts.

가. 검사는 피고인이 영업신고를 하지 아니하고 2015. 1. 20.부터 2016. 1. 7.까지 서울 은평구 C에서 ‘D’ 이라는 상호로 떡볶이, 김밥, 라면 등을 조리판매하여 휴게 음식점 영업행위를 하였다는 범죄사실로 공소를 제기하였다.

B. During the trial in the first instance trial, on January 27, 2016, the fact that the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 500,000 from January 20, 2015 to September 21, 2015 on the criminal fact that he/she committed the same act in the above D without filing a business report at the Seoul Western District Court (No. 2015 High Court Decision 11216) and received a summary order of KRW 500,000 from January 20 to September 21, 2015 was revealed.

(c)

Accordingly, the first instance court judged that the effect of the final summary order extends to the facts charged in this case, and sentenced the defendant to be acquitted.

(d)

In this case, after the prosecutor appealed, the court below's decision.