사기
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years, and for one year, for Defendant B.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., a two-year imprisonment; Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor with prison labor with prison labor for a two-year period; one-year imprisonment with prison labor for a one-year period) of the lower court is too unreasonable
2. Ex officio determination
A. In the case where the defendant's ex officio judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio, and the defendant acquired each property by deception against several victims, even though the criminal intent is a single and the method of crime is identical, each victim's damage legal interest is independent, so it cannot be understood as a single crime, and a crime of fraud is established independently by each victim.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 93Do743, Jun. 22, 1993; 2001Do6130, Dec. 28, 2001). Since the Defendant received 60 check cards from victims on a total of 54 occasions as stated in the annexed crime list as indicated in the lower judgment, the Defendant was independent of each victim, and each victim is in a substantive concurrent relationship.
Nevertheless, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the number of crimes, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.
B. According to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the records show that the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul Central District Court on June 16, 2016, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on October 13, 2016. As such, each of the crimes of this case committed before the judgment becomes final and conclusive, in relation to concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and in relation to the latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, each of the crimes of this case committed before the judgment becomes final and conclusive, the judgment of the lower court cannot be maintained.
The judgment of the court below is also delivered with respect to the defendant A.