The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of this case’s sentencing conditions, the sentence of a fine of KRW 500,000,000, imposed by the court below against the defendant, is too uneasible

2. According to the records of this case’s judgment ex officio, the Defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment with prison labor for special intimidation at the Seoul Central District Court on September 13, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 21, 2017.

However, since the crime of this case was committed in the concurrent relationship between special intimidation, etc. for which punishment became final and conclusive, and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained in this regard.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.

[Grounds for a new judgment] The summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence recognized by the court is a summary of the facts constituting a crime and evidence, and the first head of the facts constituting a crime was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for more than ten months at the Seoul Central District Court on September 13, 2017 and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 21, 2017.

With the exception of adding “”, as described in each corresponding column of the lower judgment, this is cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 329 of the choice of punishment;

1. Article 37 of the Criminal Act for the treatment of concurrent crimes: Provided, That Article 39 (1) shall apply;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the order of provisional payment are confessions and reflects by the defendant, the value of the stolen goods is not significant, and the stolen goods have been returned to the victim, and each of the special intimidation and the crime of this case stated before and after the judgment becomes final and conclusive, are concurrent crimes with the latter after Article 37 of the Criminal Act.