The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is punished by imprisonment with prison labor for the crime No. 1 of the decision of the court below, and No. 2 of the decision of the court below.

1. The decision of the court below (4 months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime No. 1 in its holding and 2 months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime No. 1 in its holding) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant, and the following reasons for reversal are as follows.

A. If the facts of the instant crime and the respective criminal records are arranged in the order of time, the following (hereinafter “2015.” are simple as “15.”

The judgment of the court below and the judgment of the court below which ruled that the crime of obstruction of the execution of official duties in the 16.3.3.3.6. 15.6. 15.6. 15. 8. 16. 16. 8. 15. 14. 14. 29 to 15. 19: the crime of obstruction, etc. of the execution of official duties in the 2nd crime in the judgment of the court below (one year of imprisonment): the crime of obstruction of the execution of official duties in the 2nd crime in the judgment of the court below (one year of imprisonment).

B. The lower court received, on March 3, 2016, the foregoing case, such as interference with the performance of official duties, which became final and conclusive on March 3, 2016, with respect to the crime No. 2 of the instant criminal facts, from the Supreme Court (Do 1310) to March 3, 2016, “decision to dismiss an appeal” (in the part of the attorney’s statement in the fourth trial protocol (the page of the trial record No. 51 of the lower court stated “decision to dismiss an appeal”), and became final and conclusive on the same day.

As a crime committed before the judgment becomes final and conclusive, Article 37 of the Criminal Act was sentenced to punishment in consideration of equity between the crime for which the above judgment became final and conclusive under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act and the case for which judgment was rendered.

In the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the term “a crime for which judgment to face with imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment has become final and the crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive” shall be deemed concurrent crimes. Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act provides that where there is a crime which has not been adjudicated among concurrent crimes, a sentence shall be imposed on the said crime in consideration of equity in the case where the said crime and the crime for which judgment have become final and conclusive are

The Act stipulates.

In light of the language, legislative intent, etc. of each of the above provisions, a crime for which judgment has not yet been rendered may be judged concurrently with a crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive.