All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

1. The decision of the court below (the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and the second instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for eight months) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

The appellate court held that each of the appeals cases against the judgment of the court below was consolidated and tried, and that each of the offenses of the judgment of the court below is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence should be sentenced in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act

Therefore, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

3. If so, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed in entirety, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of the facts constituting an offense and the evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 1, 44(1) (the point of drinking alcohol, the choice of imprisonment), Article 314(1) (the point of interference with business and the choice of imprisonment), and Article 260(1) (the point of assault and the choice of imprisonment) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. There are many kinds of criminal records as to each of the crimes in the judgment of the defendant with reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes, and the fact that the defendant was a repeated offender due to violent crimes, even though he/she was in office for the period of repeated crime, he/she did not know of the fact that he/she was sentenced to punishment due to drinking driving and violent crimes, and that he/she did not agree with the victims of the crime of interference with duties and assault

However, in light of the fact that the defendant confessions all crimes and reflects them, and the time of interference with business and the degree of assault, the degree of damage caused by the crime is not very serious.