The judgment below

Of them, parts of each of the crimes in 2017, 75 and 2017, 106, shall be reversed.

Defendant .

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal (unfair sentencing) that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year of imprisonment, two months of imprisonment, two months of imprisonment and one year of suspended sentence in April) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. An ex officio decision (as to each of the crimes of 2017 high 106 cases), several crimes for which a final decision has not been made (as to each of the crimes of 2017 high 106 cases), or a crime for which a final decision to punish with imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment has become concurrent crimes, and a crime for which a final decision has become final and conclusive prior to the final and conclusive judgment, and a crime for which a final judgment has become final and conclusive even if several crimes

Therefore, in light of the language and legislative intent of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act, if a crime for which judgment has not been rendered cannot be established concurrently with the crime for which judgment has not been rendered under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, a sentence of imprisonment shall be imposed in consideration of equity and equity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do209, Oct. 23, 2008; 2012Do1291, Dec. 27, 2012). Meanwhile, in cases where a crime for which judgment has not been rendered cannot be determined concurrently with the crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, the lower court’s sentence of imprisonment with labor cannot be duly established after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the Defendant cannot be sentenced to imprisonment with labor for not more than 20 years and for not more than 30 years after being sentenced under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do36197, Apr. 29, 207).