The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the defendant was sentenced to suspension of qualification or more severe punishment, suspension of sentence is impossible.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which rendered a deferred sentence against the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.

2. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles, Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act provides that “When a sentence of imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not more than one year, suspension of qualifications or a fine is imposed, if the circumstances in the past are obvious in consideration of the matters as prescribed in Article 51, the sentence may be suspended: Provided, That this shall not apply to a person who has been sentenced to suspension

According to the records of this case and facts in this court, the defendant was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny at the Incheon District Court on June 28, 2001 and the defendant submitted a written withdrawal of appeal to the same day and the judgment becomes final and conclusive. Thus, the defendant is disqualified for suspended sentence.

Nevertheless, the court below suspended the sentence of a fine to the defendant. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the grounds of disqualification for suspended sentence.

3. As a result, the prosecutor’s appeal on the grounds of conclusion is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor’s argument of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed, and the following is

[Discied Judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 115 of the Road Act and Articles 115 and 78 (3) of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The Criminal Procedure Act;