The judgment below

Part 1 and 2 of the Judgment of the High Court No. 2015 shall be reversed.

Of the lower judgment, the Defendant is against the judgment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) that the lower court rendered is too unreasonable that the sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months and 2 years for the remaining crimes in the holding of the lower court, and 2 years and 6 months for each of the crimes in the holding of the lower court) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

In the case of this case, the prosecutor applied for amendments to the indictment with respect to Paragraph 1 (the fraud of the victim J) of the judgment of the court below 2015 order 1439 (the fraud of the victim J) among the facts charged in this case. The prosecutor applied for amendments to the indictment with the same content as the facts charged in the following (the new judgment). This court permitted this and the subject of the judgment was changed by this court.

In this regard, among the judgment below, the crime No. 1 and No. 2 of the judgment of the court below in 2015 [1439] and the crime No. 1 of the judgment in 2015 are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one punishment is to be imposed. Thus, the part of the crime No. 1 and No. 2 of the judgment of the court below in 2015 [1] and

3. Of the lower judgment, the Defendant’s judgment on the allegation of illegality in sentencing regarding each of the remaining crimes except for the crimes Nos. 1 and 2 of the 2015 High Order 1439, supra, recognized all of the instant crimes, and the fact that the Defendant agreed smoothly with the victim R is favorable to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the number of victims of the instant crime are several victims; (b) the sum of the amount of damage is significant; (c) the Defendant has not yet been punished several times due to the same kind of crime; and (d) the Defendant has not been released from the instant crime as a repeated crime period due to the same kind of crime; and (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime; and (c) other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as indicated in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (d) the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence imposed on this part is too unreasonable.