In a case where the above imprisonment for life and the above imprisonment for a five-year term with prison labor in a concurrent crime relation with which a final and conclusive sentence has been sentenced is reduced to 20 years of imprisonment after the death, a prosecutor’s disposition of ordering execution to execute the above five-year sentence plus the above five-year sentence (negative)

Since several punishments in relation to concurrent crimes are to be executed in accordance with the punishment cases for concurrent crimes, one of the two punishments in relation to which the sentence of the defendant is imposed, and one of the two punishments in relation to finalized concurrent crimes is to be imprisonment for life, and where one of the five-year punishment is imprisonment for life, even if the above five-year punishment was reduced by imprisonment for life after the death of 20 years, the reduced punishment can only be executed, and the above five-year punishment cannot be executed, so the above five-year punishment can not be executed, and thus, the order of execution by the prosecutor to execute the above five-year punishment plus the above five-year punishment is unlawful.

Articles 38(1)1, 39(1) and (2) of the Criminal Act, Article 460 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Supreme Court Order 91Mo30 dated May 6, 1991 (Gong1567)

Prosecutor

Defendant

Supreme Court Order 91Mo30 Dated May 6, 1991

Seoul High Court Order 91 First12 Dated July 25, 1991

The reappeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds for reappeal by the prosecutor.

In the event that several punishments in a concurrent crime have become final and conclusive, the punishment shall be executed in accordance with the examples of punishment for concurrent crimes. Thus, it is clear in light of the purport of each provision of Articles 39(2), 39(1), and 38(1)1 of the Criminal Act that a serious punishment can only be executed when the death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment without prison labor for life, is either for life, or for life, and that no other punishment, other than for a fine, is executed. Thus, as in the instant case, one of the two punishments in a final and conclusive concurrent crime, which is sentenced for the respondent, is an imprisonment for life, and one of the two punishments in a final and conclusive concurrent crime, which is sentenced for the above five-year imprisonment for life, even if the above five-year imprisonment for life was reduced after the death penalty was executed after the death penalty, and therefore, the above five-year imprisonment cannot be executed after the death penalty was executed, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to Article 38 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon Young-young (Presiding Justice)