Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

A fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. Defendant 1) As to the lower judgment, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime, and the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B) Even if there is an unreasonable sentencing, even if not, the first instance court’s sentencing (a fine of KRW 1,400,000) is too unreasonable, and 2.9 million was delivered from the victim of mistake of facts against the second instance judgment). However, the victim delivered money to the Defendant under each subparagraph. Although the Defendant did not borrow money from the victim, the lower court’s judgment convicting the Defendant of this part of the facts charged was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment. (b) Even if not, even if not, the second instance court’s sentencing (a fine of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s second instance court’s sentence (a fine of three million won) imposed on the Defendant is too unhued and unreasonable.

Judgment

A. The court of original judgment Nos. 1 and 2 sentenced each judgment after completing separate hearings against the defendant, and the defendant filed an appeal against each of the above judgments, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings of the above two appeals cases. Since the first and second offenses against the defendant are concurrent offenses under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, they should be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent offenses under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, and therefore, the judgment of the court below against the defendant cannot be exempted from all reversal.

B. According to the records on the Defendant’s assertion of mental disability, even though the Defendant was found to have drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of committing the instant crime in light of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the Defendant’s attitude before and after the instant crime.