사기
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.
However, for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The defendant asserts that the summary of the grounds for appeal is unfair because the punishment sentenced by the court below (two years of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the above punishment is too uneasible and unfair.
2. In the trial of the competent court, the prosecutor added "the defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment for fraud at the Changwon District Court on September 17, 2015, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on September 22, 2015" to the facts charged in the indictment, and applied for the amendment of the indictment to add "the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act" to the applicable provisions of the Act, and since the above court changed the subject of adjudication by granting permission, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.
3. The court below's decision is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant and prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal as above. The court below's decision is reversed, and it is
[Discied Judgment] The summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence admitted by the court below and the summary of the evidence are as follows: in addition to adding "the defendant was sentenced to four months in imprisonment with prison labor at the Changwon District Court on September 17, 2015 for fraud" to "the above judgment became final and conclusive on September 22, 2015" to all facts constituting a crime of the judgment below, it is as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below.
(Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act). Application of law
1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 347 of the Election of Imprisonment;
2. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes;
3. It is recognized that the crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (a favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing below) is not significant in the amount of damage by deceiving the victim and deceiving the victim.
However, there is a conflict between the defendant and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code, which acknowledges his mistake and reflects, that the defendant has agreed smoothly with the victim, and that the judgment has become final.