Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, the part on the crime of the 2015 order group 1032 case and the judgment of the second court shall be reversed respectively.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that: (i) the sentence of each of the lower courts (i) the sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of the 2013 senior group of 1258 group of the lower judgment; (ii) six months in imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of the 2015 senior group of 1032 group of the lower judgment; and (iii) one year in imprisonment with prison labor) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio determination.

The first and second judgment against the defendant was rendered, and the defendant filed an appeal against it, respectively, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing of each of the above appeals cases.

Of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant, each crime of the 2015 order order 1032 case and the 2nd order of the judgment of the court of first instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one sentence shall be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, among the judgment of the first instance court, the part on the crime of the 2015 senior group 1032 case and the judgment of the second instance cannot be maintained as they are.

3. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the Defendant recognized and opposed to the crime of the 2013 senior group 1258 case in its judgment.

In the court below, the defendant deposited one million won for the victim S, and deposited one million won for the victim P in the court below, and the victim S expressed that the victim S does not want to be punished by the defendant in the court below.

However, even though the defendant was in a repeated crime due to the same criminal record, he again committed each of the crimes and attempted crimes.

The defendant committed each of the crimes of this case by using organized violence force and connection, and the frequency of the crimes is also several times, so punishment is required.

In addition, considering all other circumstances such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence of this part of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

4. As such, the part concerning the crime of the 2015 High Order 1032 case in the judgment of the court below and the 2.2.