The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, although the Defendant did not have inflicted an injury on the victim on the victim’s house on the day of the instant case, by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misunderstanding of the facts, and thereby adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

According to the records, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months from July 15, 2015, with prison labor for forgery of official documents, etc. at the Suwon Franchi, and was sentenced to confiscation on October 30, 2015, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on August 12, 2015, and on August 12, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on November 17, 2015, for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.) in the Sungnam Support for Suwon Flachion.

Therefore, the crime of fabrication of the above official document, violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.) and the crime of violation of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is a single concurrent crime after Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the punishment for the crime in the judgment of the court below should be imposed in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment is rendered at the same time pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the judgment of the

However, the defendant's assertion of mistake and misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

3. In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, namely, the victim was urged by the Defendant to take the face and math of the victim from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court when the victim takes part in his own house, and the victim was able to do so.