The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

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

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

2. The appellate court for ex officio judgment shall judge the grounds included in the grounds for appeal, and it may decide ex officio on the grounds that have an effect on the judgment (Article 364(1) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, even in cases where the grounds for appeal are not included in the grounds for appeal (Article 364(1) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). Meanwhile, the grounds for appeal include “when there is any reason to recognize that the amount of punishment is unreasonable” (Article 361-5 subparag. 15 of the same Act), and as above, the grounds that affect the judgment are not included in the grounds for appeal, but it does not include any limitation that the appellate court may not determine the sentence more favorable to the sentencing of the first instance.

Therefore, prior to the prosecutor’s judgment on the grounds for appeal that the sentence of the first instance is unfair because the sentence of the first instance is excessive and unfair, the court of appeals may ex officio decide whether there exists any reason to acknowledge that the sentencing is unfair. In the event that there exist such reasons, the court of appeals shall reverse the first instance judgment and determine and sentence a minor sentence than the sentencing of the first instance (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1092, Dec. 9, 2010). Before the prosecutor’s judgment on the prosecutor’s unfair judgment on the grounds for sentencing, the court of appeals may ex officio examine ex officio prior to the prosecutor’s unfair judgment on the sentencing of the first instance judgment, the Defendant recognized the instant crime and divided the error in depth, and agreed with the victims, damage amount to KRW 5,00,000, the Defendant’s mother wanted the Defendant’s preference against the Defendant, the Defendant’s health appears to have not been implemented with a multiple-year period of time, and the Defendant’s motive and condition of the instant crime to serve public interest, etc.