The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Sexual assault against the defendant for forty hours.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (an order to complete four months and forty hours of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Crimes for which judgment of ex officio by decision without prison labor or heavier punishment has become final and the crimes committed before such decision has become final and conclusive fall under concurrent crimes provided for in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, punishment shall be imposed in consideration of the equality in cases where a crime among concurrent crimes provided for in Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act has not been adjudicated and a crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive concurrently

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the lower court, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor on September 29, 2016 at the Gangnam District Court’s Gangnam Branch on the night building intrusion larceny, etc., and appealed to the Supreme Court on December 15, 2016 and was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment with prison labor on February 10, 2016. However, upon receiving a final judgment dismissing an appeal on February 10, 2017, it can be recognized that the said appellate court’s judgment became final and conclusive on the same day. As such, the instant crime and the crime for which the said judgment became final and conclusive are in the relation of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, in view of the relationship between the instant crime and the crime for which the said judgment became final and conclusive pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, the sentence shall be imposed on the instant

In this regard, although the court below stated the above criminal records in the facts of the crime and explained Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act in the application of the law, the court below did not find out all the psychological tracess through the court's decision or the statement of related persons about the following: (a) the date of prosecution for the above criminal records; (b) the date of the appellate court's decision; and (c) the inquiry about the investigation records that only identify the date of the appellate court's decision; and (d) the results of the search of the case; and (b)

If so, the court below sentenced the crime of this case to the punishment of this case by taking into account equity and the case where the above judgment was rendered simultaneously with the crime of this case under Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act.

(2) the Corporation.