Each judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two years and a fine of seven thousand won or more.

The defendant above.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and the second instance judgment: imprisonment for a period of six months and a fine of seven million won, and order to complete a program) by each court below is unreasonable compared to the extent of the defendant's liability.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the judgment of the first and the judgment of the second court against the defendant was rendered, and the defendant filed an appeal, respectively, and the court decided to hold concurrent hearings of the above two appeals cases. The crimes of the first and second judgment against the defendant are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the second and the second judgment cannot be maintained as it is, since they are concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the following is decided through a change of reasoning.

【Grounds for another judgment】 The facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence recognized by the court and the summary of evidence are the same as stated in each corresponding column of the first and second judgments, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Articles 342, 335, and 333 of the Criminal Act (the point of attempted robbery), Article 245 of the Criminal Act (the point of public performance and obscenity) and Article 39 (3), Article 9-2 (1) 1 and 5 of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders, Electronic Monitoring, Etc. (the point of violation of matters to be observed) of the same Act;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes (within the limit of the proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act for the attempts to commit robbery, and to commit quasi-Robbery with respect to the crimes of obscenity as indicated in the judgment);

1. Article 25 (2) and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (limited to any person who commits an unclaimed crime or an attempted robbery) to be legally mitigated;

1. Article 37 of the Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes Act.