[criminal power] On September 17, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and two years of imprisonment for fraud at the Suwon District Court on February 17, 2018, and the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and two years of imprisonment for fraud at the Suwon District Court on October 17, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 25 of the same year. The Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year for a crime committed before the final and conclusive judgment, and eight months for a crime committed during the suspended sentence period after the final and conclusive judgment.

The suspension of the execution of the above one year of imprisonment was invalidated upon confirmation of eight months of the above imprisonment, and the defendant is currently serving one year of imprisonment.

the same year after the filing of the appeal.

9. On August 25, 200, the number of days of pre-trial detention was over eight months, and the judgment was finalized at the time of January 24, 2019, and the execution of the above imprisonment was completed for eight months.

On January 18, 2019, the Supreme Court's decision to dismiss the defendant's appeal was sent to the defendant by public notice after two times on January 18, 2019, so the above service by public notice became effective at the time of January 24, 2019 when five days (see the proviso of Article 64 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act) have passed from the date

On the other hand, the execution of punishment is premised on the final judgment (see Article 459 of the Criminal Procedure Act). Thus, even if the number of days pending trial was sentenced to the sentence before the judgment becomes final and conclusive, it cannot be deemed that the execution of punishment is terminated even if it

At this time, it is reasonable to view that the execution of punishment is terminated simultaneously with the judgment becomes final and conclusive.

[2019 Highest 1465] On January 3, 2019, the Defendant sent to the victim D who had a contact with the Defendant by reporting the phrase “C contact pockets” posted in Defendant B, and then sent the contact pockets with the victim D who had a contact with the Defendant.

‘A false statement' was made.

However, in fact, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to send it even if he received the price from the victim.

The defendant deceivings the victim as such, and thereby, KRW 600,000 shall be paid for the goods from the victim.