The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The right of KRW 10,00 in cash confiscated.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (No. 1: imprisonment of 10 months, and 2 months: imprisonment of 6 months) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the appeal case against the judgment below was consolidated by examining ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, and each crime of the judgment below in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is one of the concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, and the judgment of the court below should be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of one of concurrent crimes under Article 38(1)

3. According to the conclusion, without examining the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, the lower judgment is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the Defendant’s argument is again decided as follows.

[Dao-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are identical to each corresponding column of each judgment of the court below, except where the list of offenses is added to the end of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 330 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 330 of the Criminal Act, Article 360 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of embezzlement by possession, the choice of imprisonment), Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud, the choice of imprisonment), Article 70 (1) 3 of the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act (the point of using the lost theft card, and the choice of imprisonment);

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The crime of this case with the reason of sentencing under Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the return of the victim is that the defendant stolen or acquired a debit card and then acquired property or pecuniary benefits equivalent to 1,045,020 won by using the said card 19 times through 19 times, and the crime is not good in light of the method of crime, frequency of crime, etc., the damage recovery has not been made up to the trial, and the defendant has not been made up of the damage recovery.