The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. On October 4, 2014, the Defendant: (a) voluntarily surrenders to investigation agencies on the part of October 4, 2014; and (b) the Defendant, as indicated in paragraph (5) of the lower judgment, did not intimidating the status of the DP organization around October 13, 2014, thereby threatening the victims.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (as stated in the judgment below 2-A. : 1 year of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence, 3 to 5, 7 of the judgment: 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Article 2-1(a) of the judgment of the court below which rendered a separate sentence at the court below. Article 3-2(b) of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, Etc. provides that a single sentence should be imposed on the defendant as a whole, on the premise that the defendant's activities and comprehensive crimes (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do7081, Sept. 10, 2015) as indicated in the judgment of the court below, the prosecutor withdraws "Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act" in the applicable legal provisions of the indictment. Article 39 (2) of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. is changed as follows; Article 6 (1) of the Criminal Act; Article 7 (2) of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, Etc.; Article 6 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 5 (2) of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. are changed as follows; Article 6 (1) of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc.; Article 6 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 6 (2)1) of the Act.

Therefore, a separate sentence is imposed on the crime of Article 2-1 (A) of the judgment below, while the remaining crimes, which include dangerous carry-on assault and bodily injury, are regarded as substantive concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.