The judgment below

The part of the defendant D against the defendant is reversed.

Defendant

D. A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than six months.

except that this judgment.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The sentence of the court below (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

Defendant A made a judgment on the instant crime under the following conditions: (a) Defendant A led to the instant crime; (b) made the instant crime under the direction of N, P, R, and S; and (c) committed the instant crime under the direction of N, P, R, etc.; and (d) the possibility of criticism is relatively minor compared to N, etc.

However, Defendant A was put into the field of a tent factory of G party with a view to labor-management dialogue and was given instructions from S et al., and was used to illegally remove the tent installed by the trade union with seven members including T et al. and use violence against the union members. Defendant A has the record of being sentenced to a fine due to an act of violence, etc., Defendant A has the record of being sentenced to a fine due to an act of violence, and the balance of punishment with Co-Defendant A, who was sentenced to the same punishment as Defendant A, should also be considered. In full view of all the factors such as Defendant A’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime and the circumstances after the crime, it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

Defendant

According to the records of judgment on D ex officio, Defendant D was sentenced to three years of suspension of execution and a fine of one million won for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a deadly weapon, injury, etc.) in the Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch on April 11, 2013, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on October 18, 2013, and Defendant D committed the instant crime before the above judgment becomes final and conclusive. As such, the crime for which judgment became final and the instant crime constitute concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the crime of this case constitutes concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and the punishment should be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt the sentence, taking into account equity and cases where the judgment is concurrently made and equity

Therefore, this does not take into account.