All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal (No. 1: Imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months and imprisonment for 2 months) by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. The defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below and decided to concurrently examine all the above appeal cases. Each of the offenses committed by the court below against the defendant is related to concurrent offenses under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a sentence should be imposed within the scope of the term of punishment increased by concurrent offenses in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more in this respect.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair assertion of sentencing, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, the summary of the evidence is cited.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud), Article 329 of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud), and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor, respectively;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. While there are favorable circumstances for the defendant, such as the fact that the value or the amount of fraud of the goods damaged by the reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act that aggravated concurrent crimes is not relatively much severe, some damages have been recovered, and the defendant acknowledges and reflects his mistake, there are also circumstances favorable to the defendant. However, in light of the circumstances such as the method and frequency of the crime in this case, it is not good to the quality of the crime, and the possibility of repeating the crime seems to be high, and the defendant repeatedly committed each of the crimes in this case during the period of repeated crimes for the same kind of crime, which is disadvantageous to the defendant.