All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the court below is too heavy or (10 months in prison) it is too heavy.

2. We examine both the judgment and the prosecutor’s unfair claims for sentencing.

In full view of the favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, relationship with the victim, circumstance after the crime, etc., and the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime; (b) the Defendant’s results of the crime, such as the method and degree of injury; and (c) the Defendant’s multiple criminal records of the same kind; and (d) the Defendant recognized the Defendant’s mistake and agreed to pay KRW 7 million to the victim; and (c) the instant special injury crime was committed in the course of exercising mutual violence with the victim; and (d) the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, relationship with the victim, and circumstance after the crime was committed.

Therefore, all of the allegations in the above sentencing by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit (the record reveals the following facts: ① the defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with labor for April 2016 by the Ulsan District Court 2016 High Court 2016 High Court 1907 (hereinafter “the first final judgment”) on July 30, 2016; ② the decision of January 20, 2017 by the Busan District Court 2016 High Court 6290 High Court 20, which was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for one year and six months (hereinafter “the second final judgment”) on June 20, 2017 (hereinafter “the final judgment”); ③ the facts charged in the second final judgment are prior to the date on which the first final judgment became final and conclusive.

Where a crime for which judgment has not yet become final and conclusive cannot be ruled concurrently with a crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, it is reasonable to interpret that punishment shall not be imposed, or mitigated or exempted from punishment by taking into account equity and equity in cases where judgment is to be rendered at the same time pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Do1203, May 16, 2014). Therefore, the instant case committed after the date of final and conclusive judgment of the first instance.