The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (each of the crimes listed in the separate sheet No. 1 through No. 5 in the crime committed in the judgment below: Imprisonment with prison labor for two years, each of the crimes listed in the separate sheet No. 6 and No. 7 among the crimes listed in the judgment below, and each of the crimes listed in paragraphs 2 and 6 among the crimes listed in the judgment below in the separate sheet No. 1 of the crimes listed in the judgment below, is unfair because it is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

In the middle of a single comprehensive crime, where there exists a final judgment on a separate crime, the single comprehensive crime shall be divided into two crimes, and the relationship between the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act shall not be achieved, but shall be treated as one crime after the final judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do5341, Aug. 22, 2003). In a case where a habitual fraud crime is committed over the period before and after the final judgment of a simple crime, such crime shall not be divided into two crimes, and it shall be completed at the time of the final crime which is the final judgment after the final judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1939, Jul. 8, 2010).

In light of this, among the facts charged in this case against the defendant, the fraud against the victim C (the second half of 2013, the second half of 4182) was induced to the effect that the defendant did not have the intent or ability to repay the borrowed money, but he borrowed it to the victim C because it is necessary to lend it for the business of the middle and high-end commercial complex, and thus, it was obtained by delivery of KRW 250,000,000 from February 28, 2012 to April 30, 2012, and the method of the crime is the same, and the method of the crime is also the same as that of the victim, each act is made repeatedly in close vicinity to time, and it shall be considered a series of criminal acts arising from a single and continuous criminal intent.