The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that the defendant's punishment imposed by the court below (one year and six months of suspended sentence, two years of suspended sentence, and 120 hours of community service order) is unfair due to excessive unfasibleness, while the public prosecutor asserts that the sentence of the court below is too unfasible and unfair (the defendant and his defense counsel explicitly withdrawn the assertion of facts or misapprehension of legal principles at the first trial date of the court below). 2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal as to the grounds for appeal, the public prosecutor examined ex officio before the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the defendant's name of the crime against the defendant in the trial "(a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.)" was "special injury", the applicable provisions of the law were to be applied to "Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 258-2 (1) of the Criminal Act "the remainder of the charges subject to be amended by the court".

In addition, Articles 157 and 153 of the former Criminal Act provide that when a person who committed an offense without a complaint makes a confession or accepts a punishment before the judgment or disciplinary action on the reported case becomes final and conclusive, the sentence shall be mitigated or remitted. According to the records, F does not prosecute the person without a complaint, and the defendant was found to have led to the confession of the instant offense at the first trial date on March 4, 2016. Thus, this constitutes the case where the defendant made a confession before the judgment on the reported case becomes final and conclusive, and thus, the punishment shall be mitigated or exempted as necessary pursuant to Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act (see Supreme Court Decision 204Do831, Apr. 9, 2004, etc.). In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained further.

3. Conclusion.