The judgment below

The part concerning the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three months.

1. The prosecutor asserts that the main reason for the appeal is that the sentence of the court below to the defendant (two years of imprisonment with prison labor for six months) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Prior to the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the public prosecutor on the grounds of the judgment on the grounds of unfair sentencing, the records show that the Defendant was sentenced on April 18, 2013 by imprisonment with prison labor for five months at the Suwon District Court Sejong District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on the 26th of the same month. As such, the above fraud for which the judgment became final and conclusive and the instant fraud of this case are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, with regard to the concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and the judgment of the court below

3. If so, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's allegation of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is so decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the evidence and criminal facts against the defendant recognized by this court and the summary of the evidence are as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except for adding "The defendant B was sentenced to five months of imprisonment for fraud from the Suwon District Court on April 18, 2013 to the Suwon District Court on April 26, 2013 and the judgment became final and conclusive on April 26, 201," and therefore, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Articles 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. The rationale for sentencing under the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act for concurrent crimes is to recognize the defendant's mistake and reflect it. Before committing the instant crime, the defendant did not have the same record of crime, and the defendant was judged at the same time as the judgment in the above "a summary of the facts and evidence" should be considered.