The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles were assaulted by the victim, did not undergo an investigation by a judicial police officer or prosecutor during the investigation process, and the prosecutor did not prosecute the victim. This is not a lawful investigation and prosecution under the Criminal Procedure Act.

B. The Defendant has committed the instant crime with mental and physical weakness.

(c)

The punishment of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of ex officio determination, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for an injury, etc. at the Seoul Northern District Court on June 15, 2017 and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 24, 2017. As such, the crime of the judgment below and the crime of injury for which judgment became final and conclusive as above are concurrent crimes in relation to a group after Article 37 of the Criminal Act and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and should be sentenced to punishment for the crime of the judgment of the court below in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously

In this respect, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of mistake and misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

B. Article 197 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides for the scope and scope of a judicial police officer’s duties and duties in regard to forestry, marine affairs, resale, taxation, military investigation agency, and other special matters under the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

Article 5 subparag. 1 and Article 6 subparag. 1 of the Act on the Persons Performing the Duties of Judicial Police Officials and the Scope of their Duties delegated by the above Act provide that a state public official of a prison, juvenile prison, or detention center may, upon the designation of the chief prosecutor of the local prosecutor’s office having jurisdiction over the place of work, perform the duties of judicial police officers with respect to offenses issued in the prison, juvenile prison, detention center, or its branch.

The record of this case is defined.