The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. On January 5, 2018, the Defendant, who was dissatisfied with the lower judgment and filed an appeal, failed to submit a statement of reason for the appeal within 20 days, which is the period for submitting the grounds for filing the appeal, even though he/she received a notice of receipt of the records of trial from this court, and the petition of appeal does not indicate the grounds for filing the

On the other hand, the Defendant appealed on May 23, 2018 on the grounds that sentencing was unfair on the first trial date.

Although the statement was made, it cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal as an assertion after the due date for submission of the statement of reasons for appeal, and it is not reasonable even if it is examined ex officio.

2. Determination ex officio: Provided, That with respect to illegal parts affecting the judgment of the court below, the crime falling under Article 5-11 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes as stated in the judgment of the court below, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act is a fine of not less than 10 years, or a fine of not less than 5 million won and not more than 30 million won, and the crime of violating the Traffic Act as stated in the judgment of the court below is a crime falling under Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, and the statutory punishment is imprisonment with prison labor for not less than 1 year and not more than 5 million won and not more than 10 million won or a fine of not more than 5 million won and less than 1 million won, in order to sentence the defendant to imprisonment with prison labor for each of the above crimes, the court below erred by failing to reduce the sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for less than 53 (1) 3 months by selecting imprisonment and adding concurrent punishment.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, on the ground that the above reasons for reversal are ex officio.