The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is the same as the defendant 1, 3, and 6 in the year table of crimes attached to the court below.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (the punishment No. 1, 3, and 7 in the table of crimes attached to the court below and the punishment No. 2, 8, and 10 in the table of crimes attached to the court below, each of which is 2,00,000 won per annum) is too unreasonable.

2. Before determining the reasoning of the Defendant’s appeal ex officio, the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court is as follows: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of eight months on June 30, 2014 to the crime of interference with business; (b) the judgment became final and conclusive on July 8, 2014; and (c) the date and time of the crime of re-crimes No. 7 in the annexed Table 2014 to the lower judgment was specified as “ around June 1 through July 7, 2014.” Accordingly, the lower court’s re-crimes No. 7 in the annexed Table 7 in the lower judgment, which are after the said judgment became final and conclusive, shall be deemed to have been committed on July 31, 2014, and thus, the lower court did not constitute a concurrent crime under Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the crime of interference with business, which is no longer affected by the judgment of the lower court, and thus, did not constitute a concurrent crime of this case.

3. Therefore, 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 of the court below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by this court is as follows, except that the phrase “O convenience store” in the column of “date, time, and place of occurrence” No. 10 in the daily list of crimes attached to the original judgment as “P convenience store” is the same as the corresponding column of the original judgment, and thus, it is acceptable as it is.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of the Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;