The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than three months and by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than three years.

1. The sentence of the lower court against the accused (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

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 been rendered cannot be judged concurrently with a crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established, and it is reasonable to interpret that a sentence may not be imposed or mitigated or remitted in consideration of equity and equity in cases where a judgment is to be rendered at the same time

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 is not applicable.

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

According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, ① the Defendant was sentenced to one-year suspended sentence of imprisonment on March 28, 2018 due to fraud, etc. on which the judgment became final and conclusive on April 5, 2018 (hereinafter “final judgment”), and on October 24, 2018, a two-year suspended sentence was sentenced to imprisonment on June 24, 2018 and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 1, 2018 (hereinafter “second final judgment”); ② A crime under the second final judgment was committed on January 25, 2018 and on the 26th of the same month, prior to the date the final judgment became final and conclusive; ③ the Defendant committed a crime under the first final judgment; and ③ the Defendant committed a crime under the first and second final judgment, as indicated in the judgment after the date the final and conclusive judgment became final and conclusive; and

C. According to the above facts, the crime of final and conclusive judgment No. 2 is committed prior to the date of final and conclusive judgment.