Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. The punishment of the lower court (a fine of 4 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the consistent statement of D, which is the complainant for the instant case, of mistake of facts (not guilty part), the defendant is not adequately specified, and the statement of financial position of the victim company may be prepared voluntarily by the defendant, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant has voluntarily consumed the amount of KRW 40 million with the intent of unlawful acquisition. Nevertheless, there is an error of misconception of facts that the court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged. 2) The above sentence sentenced by the court below of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unjust.

2. Determination

A. 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 for which judgment has not yet been rendered could not be judged simultaneously with the crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, it is reasonable to interpret that a sentence may not be imposed, or a sentence may not be mitigated or exempted, taking into account equity and equity in cases where a judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do9295, Sept. 27, 2012). According to the records, the defendant was sentenced to two years of suspension of the execution of imprisonment for one year for occupational embezzlement from the Busan District Court’s Vice Branch on October 8, 2015, and the fact that the judgment was final and conclusive on September 9, 2016 (hereinafter

(2) On August 25, 2017, in Incheon District Court Branch Branch of the Incheon District Court, sentenced two years and six months of imprisonment for fraud, and the judgment becomes final and conclusive on June 15, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as “final and conclusive judgment”) (hereinafter referred to as “final and conclusive judgment”).

(3) Since the crime of final and conclusive judgment is acknowledged to be the crime committed which was committed less than the day prior to the day when the final and conclusive judgment became final and conclusive, the crime of this case committed less than the day when the final and conclusive judgment became final and conclusive and the crime of final and conclusive judgment No. 2, which was committed less than the day before the day when the final and conclusive judgment became final

Nevertheless, the court below held that this case.