The judgment of the court below is reversed.

In the judgment of the defendant, the punishment for the crimes of Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 shall be one year, and the judgment shall be five.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal asserts that the punishment of the lower court is too large and unfair.

2. We examine ex officio the reasons for ex officio appeal as to the crime No. 5 of the judgment below prior to the judgment of the court below.

The lower court applied Article 2(2)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act with respect to the crimes of joint assault against victims AD and AE under paragraph (5) of the judgment below, and Article 2(2)1 of the Criminal Act and Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act with respect to the relevant crimes. However, even though each crime is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, there was no aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes under

Since the part concerning the crime of paragraph 5 of the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the application of laws and subordinate statutes and affected the scope of punishment, the relevant part cannot be maintained as it is.

3. The court held that the sentencing of the crimes Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the decision of the court below was unfair in the judgment of the court below, and this part of the crime was led to the confession of all the crimes and the mistake was divided. The defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant in consultation with the victim of the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury). Such circumstance is the sentencing factor to be newly considered for the defendant.

In addition, by agreement with the victim of a joint assault crime, the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant, and this part of the crime is considered for the defendant, such as special larceny, etc. in the judgment that became final and conclusive, and the relation of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Code, which should be judged simultaneously with the case of judgment.

However, even though the defendant had a record of juvenile protective disposition and criminal punishment several times for violent crimes, most of them have committed crimes, and most of them have been under investigation and criminal trial, and they have not been taken by the victims of the bodily injury, etc. are disadvantageous to the defendant.

The defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstances, and circumstances after the crime.