The part of the judgment No. 1 of the crime is reversed.

One year of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of No. 1 of the judgment of the defendant.

2. Determination ex officio on the part of the crime No. 1 in its holding

A. In light of the language, legislative purport, etc. of the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, where a crime not yet adjudicated could not be judged concurrently with the crime for which judgment became final and conclusive, the relationship of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established. The sentence of punishment or the sentence shall not be mitigated or exempted in consideration of equity and equity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do469, Mar. 27, 2014). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, the Defendant was sentenced to punishment for fraud at the Gwangju District Court on July 7, 2006, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 11, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as “final and conclusive judgment”) (hereinafter referred to as “final and conclusive judgment”) and the judgment at the Gwangju District Court on February 208, 2009, which became final and conclusive by sentence of Article 201.

The crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the No. 1 in this case was committed on May 30, 2008, which was before the final and conclusive judgment became final and conclusive, but as seen earlier, the crime of the crime of the final and conclusive judgment No. 2 in this case was committed before the final and conclusive judgment No. 1 became final and conclusive. Thus, since the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the case of the case of the case of the first final and conclusive judgment cannot be judged at the same time as the crime of the final and conclusive judgment cannot be established after Article 37 of the Criminal Act because it constitutes the crime of the final and conclusive judgment