The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. According to Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act of ex officio determination, when a person who committed an offense without accusation surrenderss himself/herself, prior to the judgment on a case on which the person reported false facts or a disciplinary action becomes final and conclusive, the punishment shall be mitigated or exempted.

It is obvious that the Defendant was led to confession of the facts charged in this case, and that the Defendant was not prosecuted against B due to assault, and that his judgment became final and conclusive.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Do7293, Aug. 1, 2018). Accordingly, the lower judgment was impossible to maintain as it is, on the ground that the punishment of the Defendant ought to be reduced or exempted in accordance with the foregoing provision.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows after oral argument.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court are as follows: (a) except for the addition of “1. Defendant’s current trial statement” to the summary of the evidence of the court below, it is identical to each corresponding column of the court below’s judgment; and (b) thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with

Application of Statutes

1. Article 156 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing of the instant crime on the grounds of Article 157, Article 153, and Article 55(1)3 (i.e., confession) of the Criminal Act for statutory mitigation is that the instant crime was committed by the Defendant without the intention of the Defendant, resulting in the risk of being unfairly punished, and furthermore, interfering with the State’s criminal justice function, and the nature of the crime is not

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case for the first time, and the defendant was not prosecuted due to the defendant's non-determination.

2.2