The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year and suspension of qualifications for a year.

except that this judgment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. The lower court, ex officio, applied Article 324 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 13719, Jan. 6, 2016; hereinafter the same) with regard to the coercion of statement No. 3 of the facts constituting an offense as indicated in the lower judgment.

In this regard, Article 324 of the former Criminal Code provides that a person who interferes with the exercise of rights by violence or intimidation or causes another person to do an unobligatory act shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years.

Article 324(1) of the Criminal Act, which was amended by Act No. 13719 of Jan. 6, 2016 and enforced on the same day, provides that “Any person who interferes with or makes another person do an act of exercising his/her right by assault or intimidation, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding 30 million won.

“A fine was added as a statutory penalty by stipulating that it is “.”

This appears to be an anti-sexual measure from the fact that various types of crime and motive of coercions are punished as imprisonment with prison labor even for minor coercions. Thus, Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act constitutes “when a punishment is more severe than that of the former Act due to a change in the law after the crime” (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do836, Mar. 24, 2016). Thus, as to the coercion of the crime No. 3 of the facts charged in the instant case as indicated in Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act, among the facts charged in the instant case, it cannot be punished pursuant to Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act, which is the former Criminal Act, and can only be punished pursuant to Article 324(1) of the former Criminal Act, which is the new corporation, as such, the lower judgment that applied Article 324 of the former Criminal Act cannot no longer maintain.

On the other hand, the court below imposed a single punishment on the whole of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below pursuant to Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act on the ground that the above part of the facts charged and the remaining facts charged are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the above part of the facts charged as well as the remaining