The judgment below

The part concerning the crime of the 2013 Highest 4792 of the judgment shall be reversed.

Defendant 5,000,000 won.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (as to each of the crimes listed in the Decision 2013 high-ranking 4293, high-ranking 2013 high-ranking 4786, high-ranking 2013 high-ranking 4918, high-ranking 2013 high-ranking 4978: Imprisonment with prison labor and fine of two years, fines of one hundred thousand won, and crimes listed in the Decision 2013 high-ranking 4792: Imprisonment with prison labor for six months) that the lower court rendered is unreasonable.

2. As to each crime listed in the holding of the lower judgment, with regard to each of the crimes listed in the 2013 senior group 4293, 2013 senior group 4786, 2013 senior group 4918, 2013 senior group 4978 as indicated in the holding of the lower judgment, it is difficult to deem that the sentence of the lower judgment is too unreasonable considering the following: (a) it is reasonable to take into account that the repair cost incurred from the destruction of vehicles caused by the destruction of vehicles in relation to the occupation of the escapeing vehicle was covered by insurance; (b) the Defendant was able to repeatedly engage in violent acts, such as taking care of a large number of unspecified persons, automobiles, etc. that the Defendant passed without any particular reason, and assaulting a police officer performing official duties; (c) there are several criminal offenses of the same kind, among which the sentence was committed, having not yet been restored

However, with respect to the crime of Article 2013Hun-Ba4792 of the judgment of the court below which was committed after the final and conclusive judgment, the defendant expressed his/her intention not to punish the defendant by mutual consent with the victim S. When the defendant is sentenced to imprisonment for a crime committed after the final and conclusive judgment, the suspension of execution should be revoked and the defendant should additionally serve for more than one year, and other various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstance before and after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is deemed to be unfair since the sentence imposed by the defendant is too excessive and therefore the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing on this part

3. Accordingly, the Defendant’s appeal against the crime in the second sentence 4792 of the judgment of the court below is with merit.