The judgment of the defendant in the 2018 Highest 1953 and the 2018 Highest 2432.

2. Ex officio determination

A. In light of the language, legislative intent, etc. of the relevant legal doctrine and the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act, if a crime for which judgment has not yet been rendered could not be judged concurrently with the crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, the relationship of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established, and it is reasonable to interpret that a sentence may not be imposed or the sentence may not be mitigated or exempted in consideration of equity and equity

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do9948 Decided October 27, 201, and Supreme Court Decision 2012Do9295 Decided September 27, 2012, etc.). Meanwhile, as long as there is no final judgment that became final and conclusive, the crime committed before and after the final and conclusive judgment cannot be judged concurrently with the crime for which judgment became final and conclusive, where multiple crimes not yet adjudicated were committed before and after the final and conclusive judgment became final and conclusive, the relationship between the several crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is deemed to be applicable, and Article 38 of the Criminal Act cannot be deemed to apply. Thus, separate punishment for each crime committed before and after the final and conclusive judgment is determined and sentenced.

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do2351 Decided June 10, 2011). B.

Judgment

According to the records of this case, on April 14, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence of imprisonment for fraud at the Changwon District Court for six-month period (hereinafter “the first final judgment”) and the judgment became final and conclusive on April 22, 2015 (hereinafter “the first final judgment”), and on June 30, 2016, the same court was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence of imprisonment for a violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (hereinafter “the second final judgment”), and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 8, 2016 (hereinafter “the second final judgment”); each crime of fraud was committed between the date when the first final and conclusive judgment became final and conclusive and the date when the second final judgment became final and conclusive, and the crime of the second final judgment was committed less than the date before the date when the first final and conclusive judgment became final and conclusive.