The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the punishment of 8 months sentenced by the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. According to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for five months at the Busan District Court on December 17, 2009, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on March 7, 2010, and the defendant committed the crime of obstruction of performance of duties and obstruction of performance of duties that constitute imprisonment without prison labor or more within three years thereafter. Thus, each of the crimes of this case constitutes a repeated crime under Article 35(1) of the Criminal Act. In such a case, each of the crimes of this case constitutes a repeated crime under Article 35(1) of the Criminal Act, and the punishment should be determined after adding up to two times the maximum term of the punishment prescribed for the crime under Article 35(2) of the Criminal Act. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the sentence and making a mistake in determining the punishment without the aggravation of a repeated crime.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.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 without examining the grounds for appeal by the defendant, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

In addition to adding "the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for five months at the Busan District Court on December 17, 2009 and completed the execution of the sentence at the Busan Detention House on March 7, 2010 while serving in prison on December 17, 2009," the facts constituting the crime acknowledged by this court are as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the defendant in the courtroom of the court;

1. Each statement made by the police officer in relation to H, J and K;

1. A report on the use of outfits;

1. A criminal investigation report (general);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: criminal records and references;