사기등
Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the crime of the first-class 1 of the case and the second-class 2020 high-class 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (a) of the lower court’s punishment (a crime of KRW 1 of the first instance judgment of the first instance and the second instance judgment of the second instance judgment of the first instance): Imprisonment with prison labor of two months, the remainder of the first instance judgment of the first instance: Imprisonment with prison labor of two years and six months, and the second instance judgment of the second instance: imprisonment with prison labor of four months) is too unreasonable.
2. We examine ex officio the judgment (as to the part on the crime of No. 1 in the judgment of the court of first instance and the crime of No. 2020 high-class 2 in the judgment of the court below) prior to the judgment of the defendant on the grounds for appeal.
According to the records, it is recognized that the defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for fraud in the Changwon District Court¡¯s Chang Branch branch on September 23, 2015 and completed the execution of the above punishment on April 5, 2016. The crime of the first instance case and the second case in the second instance judgment constitutes a repeated crime under Article 35 of the Criminal Act, which are committed within three years after the execution of the above punishment is completed.
Therefore, in determining the punishment for each of the above crimes, the court below erred by omitting the punishment for repeated crime, and therefore, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance as to each of the above crimes cannot be maintained.
In addition, since each of the above crimes is related to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment by sentence shall be determined within the scope of the term of punishment for concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, but the court below erred by omitting the sentence. Thus, the part of the judgment of the court below of first instance as to each of the above crimes
However, notwithstanding the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing on the remaining crimes of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance are still subject to the judgment of the court of this Court,
3. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing
A. Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, the Defendant is guilty of fraud with respect to each of the remaining crimes except the crime of the first-class 2019 high-class 1199 case and the crime of the second-class 2020 high-class 2 case.