The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. An applicant for the determination of compensation regarding an application for compensation shall seek an order for compensation of KRW 5 million and the amount of money from March 19, 2018 to the date of full payment.

However, as a significant portion of the claim amount claimed by the applicant, it seems that the scope of the defendant's liability for compensation is not clear, so the compensation order cannot be issued in the criminal procedure.

An application by an applicant for compensation shall not be accepted.

3. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the Defendant’s judgment was examined as to the grounds for appeal by the Prosecutor, and the record of all of the facts charged was found to have reached the trial by the Prosecutor, and the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years of imprisonment for the reason of quasi-Robbery at the Daegu High Court on November 3, 2016. The said judgment became final and conclusive on November 11, 2016, and is still under the suspended sentence.

In “The Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two-year imprisonment with prison labor for a quasi-Robbery teacher, etc. at the Daegu High Court on November 3, 2016, and the said sentence became final and conclusive on November 11, 2016, and on July 20, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and four months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint coercion) at the Daegu District Court on July 20, 2017, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 25, 2017.

The judgment of the court below is no longer maintained because it changed to "," and the defendant applied the law to "Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act," and this court applied the application for amendments to the bill of amendment, which added "Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act," and the judgment of the court below was changed

4. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair assertion of sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed, and it is again decided after pleading as follows, and it is dismissed pursuant to Article 32(1)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.