The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The case shall be transferred to the Changwon District Court Panel Division of the Changwon District Court.

1. The sentencing of the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable as the gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, among the facts charged in the instant case, is a crime for which statutory punishment is prescribed by imprisonment with prison labor for life or for not less than six years (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do6886, Dec. 8, 2006) pursuant to Article 5-4(6) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Articles 329 and 330 of the Criminal Act, and is subject to the jurisdiction of the collegiate panel of the district court under Article 32(1)3 of the Court Organization Act, and thus, the judgment of the court below should have been judged as the first instance court. However, it is obvious that the collegiate panel of Changwon District Branch Branch Branch Court was judged as a substantive person,

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is based on the grounds of the above ex officio reversal. Thus, without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, it is decided to transfer the case to the Panel Division of the Changwon District Court, which has jurisdiction under the main sentence of Article 367 of the Criminal Procedure Act (Article 4 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). The territorial jurisdiction is to be the place of crime, the defendant's domicile, residence, or present location, and the present location should be determined at the time of institution of the public prosecution. In this case, the original district court is not within the jurisdiction of the original district court at the time of institution of the public prosecution, since one of the crime scene, address, domicile, and present location of the defendant at the time of institution of the public prosecution is not within the jurisdiction of the original district court at the original district court. Accordingly, the original