A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, the period of three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A. The re-crime 4 attached to the misunderstanding of legal principles is committed under the Defendant’s single and continuous criminal intent, and the method of committing the crime and the damaged legal interest are the same and the time of committing the crime is continuous, and thus, a single comprehensive crime is established.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the part 1 to 9 times in the annexed crime list 4 times in the annexed crime, considering that a separate crime is established by night-time spring teacher, is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, and 160 hours of community service) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Where it is reasonable to evaluate the whole of the repeated actions conducted in a similar manner at a time and place close to a single and continuous criminal intent, etc., all of them shall be punished as a single comprehensive crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do12937, Jul. 24, 2014). The statute of limitations for a single comprehensive crime shall commence when the last criminal act has been committed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3926, Sept. 10, 2015). From around March 3, 2010 to February 2, 2015, the Defendant’s act of using one-time and one-time teacher as a single one-time teacher at night, night, and one-time, one-time teacher at night, one-time, one-time, one-time, one-time, and another one-time, one-time, and one-time, one-time, one-time, one-time, and another one-time teacher who has worked as a single-time teacher at night.

Therefore, the statute of limitations for this case is applicable.