The remainder, excluding the dismissed portion of the application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.

2. Ex officio determination (an ex officio determination under Article 37 of the Criminal Act);

A. According to the records, on November 1, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court and two years of probation, and on November 9, 2006, the above judgment became final and conclusive (hereinafter “the first final judgment”). On November 6, 2009, the same court was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. (the criminal facts from April 2006 to August 2006), and on November 14, 2009, the above judgment became final and conclusive (hereinafter “the second final judgment”) on November 30, 2010 (the above judgment became final and conclusive”) by being sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. from March 2007 to May 207, 201 (the above judgment became final and conclusive from May 21, 201 to May 31, 2015 (hereinafter “the above judgment”).

B. According to the above facts, each crime of the third final and conclusive judgment is committed before the date of the final and conclusive judgment. However, each crime of the second final and conclusive judgment can be judged at the same time with each crime of the first final and conclusive judgment, and thus, there is a relationship of latter concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Since each crime of the third final and conclusive judgment does not constitute a case where judgment can be rendered at the same time with each crime of the second final and conclusive judgment, it does not constitute a crime of latter concurrent crimes of Article 3

However, Article 38 of the Criminal Act is recognized as a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act among several crimes, if several crimes which have not yet been adjudicated were committed before and after the final judgment became final and conclusive, and there is no final judgment, because the crimes committed before the final and conclusive judgment could not be judged concurrently with the crimes for which judgment became final and conclusive.