The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be exempted from punishment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which granted the suspended sentence against the defendant who had been sentenced to the suspension of qualification or heavier punishment is erroneous in misapprehending the legal principles as to the suspended sentence.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant (the 500,000 won of a fine) is too uncomfortable.

2. The proviso of Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act provides that a sentence may not be suspended for a person who has been sentenced to a suspension of qualification or heavier punishment.

According to the records of this case, the Defendant was sentenced to three years and six months to imprisonment for robbery, injury, etc. at the Ulsan District Court on December 5, 2011 and was sentenced to suspension of qualification or more than several times on June 28, 2012, as well as the fact that the above judgment became final and conclusive on June 28, 2012, and thus, the Defendant constitutes “a person who has been sentenced to suspension of qualification or more” under the proviso of Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act and thus, is disqualified for suspension of sentence. Therefore, the lower court, which suspended the Defendant’s sentence, erred

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is justified.

3. If so, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit. Thus, without examining the argument of unfair sentencing, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting an offense and the summary of the evidence acknowledged by this court is as follows: (a) The facts constituting an offense in the original judgment, except for adding “the defendant is a person who was sentenced to imprisonment for three years and six months on December 5, 201 with prison labor for robbery, injury, etc. by this court on December 5, 201, and whose judgment has become final and conclusive on June 28, 2012” to all the facts constituting an offense in the original judgment, and thus, it is identical to

Application of Statutes

1. Article 347 (1) and Article 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the relevant criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines;

1. The treatment of concurrent crimes and the exemption of punishment Article 37 of the Criminal Act;