The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

1. According to the records of the court’s scope of trial, the defendant filed an appeal by being sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence (hereinafter “relevant conviction”) for the crime of forging private documents and uttering of falsified investigation documents at the Suwon District Court on April 14, 2016, on April 12, 2016. The court below decided on May 12, 2016 to concurrently examine the appeal case (No. 2015No1600) against the judgment of the court below and the appeal case against related conviction (No. 2016No2661) against the judgment of the court below. The defendant stated on May 13, 2016 that he withdraw an appeal against related conviction at the seventh trial of the court below on May 13, 2016.

According to the above facts, since the judgment of conviction was separated and finalized, only the part of the judgment below falls under the scope of the judgment of this court.

2. The summary of the reasons for appeal (two years and six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of ex officio judgment.

(a) Crimes for which judgment to face with imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment has become final and the crimes committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive shall constitute concurrent crimes provided for in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, with respect to concurrent crimes which have not been adjudicated among those under Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act, punishment shall be sentenced in consideration of equity with where the relevant

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do209 Decided October 23, 2008, etc.). B.

According to the facts of recognition under Paragraph (1) above, the judgment of the court below is in relation to the crime of forging private documents, the crime of uttering of falsified documents and the crime of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, for which a sentence of

Therefore, with respect to fraud in the judgment of the court below, the court below shall consider equity in cases where the crime of forging private documents and the crime of uttering of falsified documents is concurrently judged pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act and determine punishment by examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment. As a result, the court below shall apply the legal principle of Article 39(1)