The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The argument after the lapse of the period for appeal due to misapprehension of legal principles is not timely filed, but this part of the argument is subject to ex officio determination, and thus, the argument and judgment on the grounds for appeal are examined.

The Defendant made confession of all the facts constituting the instant crime during the first trial of the lower court, and the lower court omitted the requisite mitigation of punishment under Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (ten months of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misapprehension of legal principles

A. Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act provide for a confession prior to the conclusion of a judgment, on the grounds that the punishment shall be mitigated or remitted, in a case where a person who committed an accusation, surrenders himself/herself to a confession or surrenders before the judgment or disciplinary action on the reported case becomes final and conclusive.

Since there is no legal limitation on the above confession procedure, it is hard to view that the confession procedure as a witness of the institution dealing with the reported case or of the full bench dealing with the case as a witness of the court dealing with the reported case, not only is it clear that the previous report was a false fact but also it is included in the concept of confession by examination conducted by the court or investigation agency as the defendant or suspect of the high case.

In addition, the phrase “before the judgment becomes final and conclusive” under Article 153 of the Criminal Act includes the cases where the investigation of the accused’s accusation was revealed as a result of the investigation of the accused’s accusation and the prosecution against the accused is instituted against the accused and the trial proceedings have not been initiated with respect to the accused (Supreme Court Decision 2018Do7293 Decided August 1, 2018).

According to the records, it is recognized that the prosecutor's disposition of non-prosecution was issued on May 30, 2019 with respect to C, the object of the instant accusation, and the Defendant has led to the confession of all of the crimes from the first trial date of the lower court to the trial of the first instance.

Therefore, the defendant.