Defendant

A and B Imprisonment with prison labor for two years, and with respect to the crimes of "2016 Gohap 700" as decided by the defendant C, I shall be sentenced to one year and six months.

(b) Selection;

D. Defendant E: The date and time of committing a crime by Defendant E under Article 4(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (including joining a criminal organization) is a policeman on October 2010, and the main sentence of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act does not apply.

1. Aggravationd criminal defendant D: Article 35 of the Criminal Act [Inasmuch as there is a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., the execution of which was terminated on May 3, 2008, referring to the restriction under the proviso to Article 42 of the former Criminal Act];

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

(a) Defendant C: The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act: Provided, That Articles 39 (1) and 55 (1) 3 [the crimes of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (organization and activities of organizations, etc.) and violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (injury to groups, deadly weapons, etc.) of which judgment becomes final and conclusive];

B. Defendant D: The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act: Articles 39(1) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act [Intersection of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Composition and Activities of Organizations, etc.) and the violation of the Narcotics Control Act (favour) as indicated in the judgment of November 29, 2012] * Defendant E was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for six months at the Incheon District Court on June 2, 2009 and the decision became final and conclusive on June 10, 2009 (hereinafter “the first final and conclusive judgment”) on December 28, 2010, by a fine of six months, with respect to a crime of fraud committed by the Incheon District Court on May 28, 201, and the above final and conclusive judgment on October 1, 2009 and KRW 20,000 (hereinafter “the above final and conclusive judgment”).

Although the Defendant committed the instant crime on October 201, 201, which was before the date when the second final judgment became final and conclusive, there exists a separate final and conclusive judgment on the Defendant. From among the crimes in the second final and conclusive judgment, the crimes committed around May 2009 before the date when the first final and conclusive judgment became final and conclusive, and thus, cannot be judged at the same time from the beginning with the instant crime, and thus, a single concurrent crime relationship cannot be established after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the case is equity in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act.