All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of Defendant 2’s original sentence (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(b) The first sentence of the original judgment (9 million won in penalty) of the Prosecutor is too unfilled and unjust.

2. The appellate court, ex officio, decided to hold a joint hearing of each appeal case of the judgment below.

The judgment of the court below, in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, shall be concurrently sentenced pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence shall be sentenced within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes.

Therefore, all judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

3. In conclusion, the judgment below is reversed in its entirety pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows, without further proceeding to decide on the unfair argument of sentencing by the defendant and the prosecutor.

Criminal facts

The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by this court shall be as shown in the corresponding columns of the original judgment.

In accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act, they are quoted as it is.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act that govern the crime, the choice of punishment for a crime (a interference with the performance of official duties, a choice of imprisonment), Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (a) (a point of interference with duties, a choice of imprisonment with prison labor), Article 366 of the Criminal Act (a point of damage to property, and a choice of imprisonment with prison labor);

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

1. The Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime due to the crime of injury, etc. under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes, and the fact that there was a history of punishment several times due to violent crimes, and that the injury has not been recovered is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant is against the defendant, the degree of interference with the victim D's business is not significant, and the fact that it seems to lead to each of the crimes of this case by contingency, etc. shall be considered in favor of the defendant, and other circumstances.