The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10 million.

The defendant above.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. In light of the language, legislative intent, etc. of the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, where a crime for which judgment has not yet been rendered could not be judged concurrently with a crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established and concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act cannot be established, and the sentence cannot be mitigated or exempted

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do9295, Sept. 27, 2012). (B)

The record reveals the following facts: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment and the final judgment on May 28, 2019; (b) the crime of injury or damage to property committed on or around May 18, 2018; (c) the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) committed on or around May 22, 2018; and (d) the crime of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (joint Injury) committed on or around May 22, 2018 at Suwon District Court on December 6, 2018; (d) the crime of violation of the said Act (Joint Injury); (e) the crime of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act committed on or around September 10, 2018; (e) the crime of violation of the said Act (Joint Injury); and (e) the crime of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc., on or around October 18, 2018; and (e) the crime of embezzlement of KRW 3 (Joint 13, 193) the said Act.

C. However, the instant crime is a crime of aiding and abetting perjury committed on or after July 18, 2019, and, as such, the crime was committed after the day of the judgment of the previous offense (as of May 28, 2019), the crime was committed during the period from September 1, 2018 to November 1, 2018, and the crime was committed during the period from September 1, 2018 to the day of the judgment of the previous offense (as of the instant crime and the crime of the previous offense, the crime was committed during the period from September 2018 to November 1, 2018, and thus, the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act does not constitute a concurrent crime.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the crime of this case.