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

The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for the crime No. 1 of the above judgment.

A. Each sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime No. 1 as stated in the court below's holding) is too unreasonable.

B. Each sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below on the defendant is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant and prosecutor as to the crime No. 1 of the judgment of the court below as to the crime No. 1 of the judgment of the court below.

(1) In light of the language, legislative intent, etc. of the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, if a crime not yet adjudicated could not be judged concurrently with the crime for which judgment became final and conclusive, the concurrent crime relationship after Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established, and the sentence of punishment or the sentence may not be mitigated or exempted in consideration of equity and equity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do469, Mar. 27, 2014). (2) The lower court sentenced the Defendant to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud and fraud at the Seoul Western District Court on Nov. 19, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on Apr. 23, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “final judgment of this case”) and the judgment of the Seoul District Court on Apr. 28, 2015, which became final and conclusive on Apr. 23, 2015.

On the other hand, by applying Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Code, a judgment was rendered on the first crime in the judgment of the court below.

However, according to the records of this case, the defendant at the Gwangju District Court on January 27, 2014.