The requirements for concurrent crimes stipulated in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and whether the judgment imposing a fine, or the final judgment of summary order may constitute concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act (negative)

Article 37 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Kim Jong-sik

Changwon District Court Decision 2017No469 decided April 26, 2017

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Changwon District Court Panel Division.

Judgment ex officio is made.

In the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the term “a crime for which judgment of imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment has become final and a crime committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive” as concurrent crimes. Thus, a crime for which judgment of a fine or a summary order has become final and conclusive cannot be concurrent crimes under the latter part

According to the records, the court below recognized that each crime committed prior to the day on which each of the summary orders in the judgment against the defendant becomes final and conclusive, and each of the crimes committed prior to the day on which each of the above summary orders becomes final and conclusive, is in a concurrent crime under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and determined a separate punishment for each of the crimes committed prior to the day on which each of the above summary orders becomes final and conclusive, and determined the punishment for each of the crimes

However, in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, each of the above crimes committed by the Defendant before and after the confirmation of each of the above summary orders cannot be a concurrent crime under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and all of them are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one of them must be sentenced. Nevertheless, the lower court determined otherwise, so there is an error of law by misapprehending the legal principles of latter concurrent crimes under

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the grounds of appeal, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim So-young (Presiding Justice)