All the judgment below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor and the 3 months of imprisonment with prison labor) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant, this Court tried to examine the two cases of appeal by combining the two cases of appeal against the defendant by the court. The crimes of each case deliberated in the trial by the court in question are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment increased by concurrent crimes in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, each judgment of the court below cannot escape from reversal.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the above ground for ex officio reversal, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by the court is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 231 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 231 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act, Article 239 of the Criminal Act, Article 239 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 239 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 347 of the Criminal Act, each of the following:

1. Of concurrent offenders, the reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act appears to have recognized the Defendant’s mistake and against himself/herself, and the Defendant, upon being investigated due to the suspicion of assaulting E, stolen the name of pro-Japanese F by taking advantage of the name of pro-Japanese. The facts that the Defendant committed assault against E in the above investigation process are sent to the prosecutor’s office without suspicion, and the amount acquired by the Defendant is relatively larger than the victim K and L.