The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the case of fraud 1 in misunderstanding the legal principles, a single crime is established only when the criminal intent is single and the method of crime is the same. Of the crime against the victim B, the phrase “the part Nos. 1 to 169 of the judgment of the court below” and “170 to 180 of the judgment of the court below” are different from the contents of deception. Thus, both are not in the relation of a single crime.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which held the whole crime of fraud against the victim B as an inclusive crime is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2) Of the crime of fraud against the victim B, the part Nos. 1 to 169 of the attached Table 1 of the judgment of the court below in relation to the crime committed against the victim B is in a concurrent relationship between the crime of fraud for which the judgment became final and conclusive (the Daejeon District Court Decisions 2017Da4346 decided January 17, 2018, and January 25, 2018) and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the judgment of the court below that sentenced one punishment for the crime of fraud against the victim B is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2. Determination

A. Determination of the misapprehension of legal principles as to the assertion of the same crime: (a) where multiple acts falling under the name of the same crime or continuous acts are continuously conducted for a certain period under the single and continuous criminal intent and where the legal benefits from such acts are the same, each of such acts shall be punished by a single comprehensive crime; (b) in the case of fraud, where the criminal intent is single and the method of committing the crime is the same in case where a deceptive act has been committed several times against the same victim through several times, only a single crime of fraud is established (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2010Do1588, Nov. 25, 2010; 2015Do10948, Oct. 29, 2015). Meanwhile, the statute of limitations of public prosecution proceeds from the completion of the criminal act (Article 252(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act); and (c) the statute of limitations of public prosecution as to the single comprehensive crime is duly adopted by the evidence duly examined by the court below (see, etc.