A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

A. Each sentence of the judgment of the court below (the judgment of the court below No. 1: Imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months and 2 months: imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months) is too unreasonable.

(b)the form of the first instance judgment of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable;

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing of each of the above appeals cases.

Each of the crimes committed by the lower judgment convicting the Defendant is in a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the lower judgment is no longer maintained.

3. If so, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio as seen above, and the judgment below is reversed in accordance with 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 the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court are identical to the facts charged and the summary of the evidence, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud), Article 246(2) and Article 246(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of habitual gambling), the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. The reason 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 is as follows: (a) even though the Defendant had been punished for the same kind of crime, the Defendant committed repeatedly against many unspecified victims and did not recover from any damage; and (b) the gambling amount reaches approximately KRW 35 million; and (c) the Defendant did not have any criminal record exceeding the fine as his age.