A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts as stated in each of the judgment of the first and second original courts, Defendant 1 was sufficiently able to repay the money from the victims at the time of borrowing the money, and there was no intent to repay the money, so there was no deception from the victims. 2) The sentence of each judgment of unfair sentencing (the first and second court: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years: 1 year) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence of the second judgment of the prosecutor (e.g., e., e., e., e., e.g.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on each of the grounds for appeal above ex officio, the first and second court sentenced the defendant to the above punishment after having undergone a separate examination against the defendant respectively, and the defendant was sentenced to the above punishment. The defendant filed an appeal against the second and second court judgment, and the court of the first and second court decided to concurrently examine the above appeal cases. Each of the crimes of the court below against the defendant was related to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the period of punishment for aggravated concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, all of the judgment of the court below cannot be exempted.

However, although the judgment of the court below has the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts against the judgment of the court below is still subject to the judgment of this court.

B. The Defendant made a confession of all the facts charged in the judgment of the court of first instance as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts. The confession was made in the presence of a defense counsel in the presence of a judge who is guaranteed objectivity and fairness by the statute, and there are no special circumstances to suspect the credibility of the confession. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of first instance, in particular, the statement to the investigation agency of the complainant D, each certified copy of the register, and the statement of obligations.