The remainder of the compensation order, excluding the compensation order, shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment of one year and ten months.

A. Of the facts charged in the case of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (Defendant A) (1) 2012 Highest 6186, the crimes listed in No. 1 annual table 43 of crime sights and the crimes listed in No. 48 per annum of crime sights (Fraud by using computers, etc.) among the facts charged in the case of 2012 Highest 7137 constitutes double prosecution.

(2) From among the facts charged in the case of the 2012 Highest 7137 cases, Defendant A did not commit a crime in light of the victim’s confirmation that the use of each computer, etc. listed in 46,69 was not caused any damage.

(3) Since Defendant A paid only KRW 100,00,000,000 per unit, KRW 120,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won, Defendant A did not commit a crime committed by Defendant A, among the facts charged in the case of 2012 High-Ma6186, which was paid with money other than the above money, Nos. 1, 30,53, and Nos. 21,22,28, 49, 81, 82, 10, 10, 105, 108, and 120, the daily list of crimes (Fraud by using computers, etc.) among the facts charged in the case of 2012

(4) Since Defendant A made a settlement between 10:00 and 17:30, Defendant A only between 10:00 and 17:30, Defendant A was not a criminal act committed by Defendant A, among the facts charged in the case of 2012 senior group 62,63 and 2012 senior group 7137, each of the computer, etc. as indicated in the list of crimes (Fraud by using computers, etc.) No. 119 and 120, among the facts charged in the case of 2012 senior group 6186.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants (defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for two years, and imprisonment with prison labor for ten months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. (1) Ex officio determination (1) prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by Defendant A, the lower court, despite citing the attached Table 2 from the criminal facts of the case 2012 Highest 6186, committed a mistake that did not specify the criminal facts by omitting the attached Table 2, and such illegality affected the judgment.

(2) However, there are reasons for the above ex officio destruction.