All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of six months and a fine of three hundred thousand won.

The defendant above.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the 4 months of imprisonment with prison labor for the first instance judgment, the 2 months of imprisonment with prison labor for the second instance judgment, and the 300,000 won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio, this Court tried to examine the two cases of appeal by combining the two cases of appeal by the defendant. The crimes of each case deliberated in the trial by the court in question are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, which should be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be reversed in its entirety.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the above reasons for ex officio reversal exist, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the gist of the evidence admitted by the court is as follows, except where the “1. Defendant’s legal statement” in the summary of the evidence is deemed as “1. Defendant’s legal statement at the original trial,” and thus, it is identical to each corresponding column of the lower court’s judgment. Therefore, it is cited as it is in accordance

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business, the choice of imprisonment), and Article 3 (3) 1 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act (the point of disturbance for cancellation by government offices and the selection of fines);

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders (With respect to the crime of interference with business)

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37 and Article 38 (1) 2 and 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for the sentencing of Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act in the custody of the workhouse appears to be that the defendant recognized his mistake and reflects it, the defendant is receiving mental and medical treatment due to a disability in the division of labor, and the fact that the defendant agreed with the victims is favorable.

On the other hand, the defendant in 2012.