The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant filed a request for the appointment of a national defense counsel in the form of a separate sentence at the lower court, the lower court erred by failing to select a national defense counsel and rendering a judgment that is, without proceeding to proceed with a national defense counsel, in violation of the statutes relating to litigation procedures.

B. The sentence of the lower court against the Defendant (three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of violation of Acts and subordinate statutes regarding litigation procedures

A. Article 33(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides, “Where the defendant is unable to appoint a defense counsel due to poverty or any other reason, the court shall appoint a defense counsel if requested by the defendant.

Article 282 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "No case selected as a national defense counsel pursuant to the above provision shall be amended without a defense counsel."

Article 17(3) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure provides that "If there is a request to appoint a national defense counsel under Article 33(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, a national defense counsel must be appointed without delay.

Article 6(1) of the Regulations on National Ship Defense Protection provides that "where a defendant requests the appointment of a national defense counsel from the defendant pursuant to Article 33(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the court of first instance shall examine the details of the written request submitted by the defendant, the details of the written indictment, other explanatory materials, etc. and then select a national defense counsel without delay in any of the following cases, unless there are special circumstances:

“The provision includes “where the person is detained in a separate case or is convicted of another criminal case” under subparagraph 8.

B. According to the records of this case, on November 30, 2016, before the prosecution of this case was instituted, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for the establishment of a separate gambling place on the same day on the same day (U.S. District Court 2016 High Court 2016 High Court 3414), and was detained on the same day (the appeal).