The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for four months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment without prison labor) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the trial court on September 19, 2019, prior to the judgment on the grounds for an ex officio appeal, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (fence) at the Seoul Central District Court on September 19, 201, and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 14, 2020.

The crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. and the crime of this case, which became final and conclusive, shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity in cases where a judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 3

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed under Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for ex officio reversal, and the judgment below is again decided as follows.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment of the court below] The summary of criminal facts and evidence admitted by this court is as follows: "The defendant was sentenced on September 19, 201 to two and a half years and six months for the violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (fence) at the Seoul Central District Court on September 19, 2019 and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 14, 2020" in the first head of the judgment of the court below; and except for addition of "1. copy of each judgment and each case agreement auxiliary meeting" at the last part of the evidence, it is identical to the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it is acceptable

Application of Statutes

1. Article 3 (1), Article 268 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act, concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Trade name;