All of the judgment below of this case is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for each crime listed in the judgment of the first instance.

1. The punishment sentenced by the original court (No. 1: Imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and imprisonment for 2 months) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the judgment of the court below on the ground for appeal in this part by the defendant prior to the judgment on the ground for appeal.

Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Code provide that when a person who has committed an offense without a complaint surrenderss himself/herself or surrenders himself/herself before the judgment or disciplinary action on the offense becomes final and conclusive, the punishment shall be mitigated or remitted.

However, in the trial of the court of first instance, the defendant led to the confession of the crime among the facts charged by the court of first instance, and the judgment of the court of first instance as to E became final and conclusive as the person who was in the record

Since there is no evidence to support the crime of false accusation of this case, the punishment of the crime of this case shall be mitigated or exempted pursuant to Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, without mitigation or exemption from punishment for the crime of false accusation in this case, the judgment of the court of first instance which sentenced one punishment for the crime of false accusation in relation to the victim E, which is in the relationship of concurrent crimes in the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, became unable to be maintained as it is.

2. We examine ex officio the decision of the court below on the ground for appeal in this part by the defendant in the judgment of the court below No. 2.

According to the records, there is a relationship between the crime in the second instance judgment and the crime in the second instance judgment after Article 37 of the Criminal Code.

In addition to the fraud prescribed by the person, as well as the fraud, the defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment at the Busan District Court on September 18, 2012, and on November 30, 2012, each of the crimes, such as fraud, for which the judgment became final and conclusive, is in the relationship of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the crime in the judgment of the second instance. Therefore, in determining the punishment for the crime in the judgment of the second instance, the equity should be taken into account when all of the above crimes for which judgment has become final and conclusive

Therefore, the judgment of the court below 2 which determined the punishment against the defendant cannot be maintained as it is.

4. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below of this case is examined as above.