The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Nos. 7 and 8 of seized evidence shall be charged to the defendant respectively.

1. The fact that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case, the defendant later surrendered, and the crime of this case is in the concurrent relation between the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (organization of Organizations, etc.) for which judgment has become final and the crime of this case as stated in the judgment of the court below after the date of the crime, and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the fact that it is necessary to determine punishment in consideration of equality with the case where a judgment is to be rendered simultaneously under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, etc. is considered favorable for

However, the defendant has been punished for the same crime. In particular, the crime of this case is a crime committed while being tried for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the composition of an organization, etc.). When the defendant applied for a prior warrant of detention for the crime of this case, the defendant escaped abroad and stayed in the Philippines for more than three years, and the defendant was forced to live in the Republic of Korea before the expiration of the term of validity of the passport. In light of the circumstances, it is difficult to see that the defendant's self-sufficiency is against the defendant's true criminal act and is divided into one another in light of the circumstances, and it is difficult to see that the situation after the crime is very poor. Considering the various sentencing conditions as well as various sentencing conditions indicated in the record, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, it is recognized that imprisonment with prison labor (one year, two years of suspended execution, 160 hours of social service, confiscation) of the court below is too unreasonable.

2. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by the court is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Therefore, it is true in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.