The judgment below

The part concerning paragraphs 1, 3-A, and 5 of the Decision 2013 Ma61, 61, 3-A and 5 shall be reversed.

Defendant .

1. The sentence of the lower court (the imprisonment of 6 months and the fine of 700,00 won) against the accused against the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio decision (Article 2013Ma61 (1), 3-1 (5) of the Judgment of the original court)

A. In light of the language, legislative intent, etc. of the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, if a crime for which judgment has not yet become final cannot be judged concurrently with a crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, it is reasonable to interpret that the relationship of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established and that the sentence may not be imposed or mitigated or remitted in consideration of equity and equity in the case of concurrent judgment pursuant to

On the other hand, Article 38 of the Criminal Act is not applicable to several crimes which have not yet been adjudicated before and after the final judgment became final and conclusive, since there is no final and conclusive judgment on the grounds that the crimes committed before and after the final and conclusive judgment cannot be judged concurrently with the crimes for which the final and conclusive judgment became final and conclusive, among several crimes, the relation of concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is recognized and Article 38 of the Criminal Act cannot be deemed to apply

(See Supreme Court Decision 2014Do469 Decided March 27, 2014, etc.). B.

According to the records of this case, each of the crimes listed in the judgment of the court below (hereinafter “each of the crimes committed by the court below”) is committed before the defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence to six months of imprisonment for fraud in the Jeonju District Court’s branch court’s Seoul District Court’s branch court’s branch court’s decision that was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence to be a crime of fraud on February 24, 2012. However, the defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for fraud in the Jeonju District Court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s decision of July 5, 2010 and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 24, 2012, and each of the crimes described in the judgment that became final and conclusive prior to the final and conclusive judgment on July 5, 2010.