The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment of one year and six months and fine of 30,000,000 won, Defendant D shall be punished by imprisonment of two years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts: Defendant A was not the captain of the Chinese fishing vessel N (30 tons, 200 EMs, necks, hereinafter “instant fishing vessel”); Defendant A was a seafarer; Defendant A was not resistanceed by the captain of the instant fishing vessel; Defendant A, as stated in the judgment of the court below, to make it difficult to keep the special fluences, etc. of the special fluences, and to escape to the North Korean sea.

B. Unreasonable sentencing: Each sentence of the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A: imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months and fine of 40,000,000 and confiscation, Defendant D: Imprisonment of 2 years, Defendant E, F, G, and I: Imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment ex officio as to the number of crimes;

A. We examine ex officio the fishery activities of Defendant A in an exclusive economic zone by applying Articles 17 subparag. 1 and 4 of the Act on the Exercise of Sovereign Rights on Foreigners' Fishing, etc. in the Exclusive Economic Zone, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 144(2) and (1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act as to the Defendants' injury or injury caused by the special obstruction of performance of official duties, and each of the above offenses committed by the Defendants constitutes concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and as to Defendant A, the court below imposed the punishment against the Defendants by applying each of the above offenses constitutes concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, on the ground that each offense committed by the Defendants constitutes concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. The court below imposed both imprisonment with prison labor with prison labor and the Act on the Exercise of Sovereign Rights on Foreigners' Fishing, etc. in the exclusive economic zone as to each of the remaining Defendants.

However, considering the fact that the crime of injury resulting from the above special obstruction of performance of official duties is constituted by two bodily harm in the same process of performing the act of special obstruction of official duties by the same defendants, there are substantive concurrent crimes.