In a case where an extraordinary appeal was filed against a final and conclusive judgment of KRW 300,000 by applying Article 3(3)2 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, the case holding that the judgment of the court below which sentenced a fine of KRW 300,000 to a fine exceeding the permissible scope in the summary judgment proceedings constitutes a case where the court below erred in violation of statutes, although it should have been punished within the scope not exceeding KRW 200,000 under Article 2

Article 3(3)2 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, Article 2 of the Procedure for Summary Trials Act, Article 441 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

Prosecutor General;

Summary trial of Article 2014-60 decided March 28, 2014

The original summary judgment shall be reversed. The defendant shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won. If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in the workhouse for the period calculated by converting 50,000 won into one day.

The grounds of emergency appeal are examined.

According to the records, on March 28, 2014, the court below rendered a summary judgment to the effect that the defendant is punished by a fine of 300,000 won by applying Article 3(3)2 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act to the defendant's violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act on March 28, 2014, and that the judgment becomes final and conclusive upon the lapse of the period for requesting formal trial.

However, Article 2 of the Act on the Procedure for Summary Trials provides that "the judge of a district court, a branch court, or a Si/Gun court may impose a fine not exceeding 200,000 won on a defendant under the summary judgment proceedings." Thus, the court below should have been punished within the extent not exceeding 200,000 won in the event of the selection of a fine among the punishments provided for in Article 3 (3) 2 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that sentenced a fine of KRW 300,000,00 in excess of the permissible scope in the summary trial proceedings constitutes a case where the judgment violates the statutes, and thus, the ground of appeal

Therefore, according to the proviso of Article 446 subparagraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the original summary judgment against the defendant is reversed, and it is again decided as follows.

Therefore, the original summary judgment is reversed, and criminal facts against the defendant are cited in the corresponding column of the summary judgment, and the sentence is imposed by applying Article 3(3)2 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act to the same type as the written judgment. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim So-young (Presiding Justice)