The part concerning the victim J and K in the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed, respectively.

The defendant shall be held.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal: The punishment of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the first instance court’s imprisonment with prison labor for three years and six months, and the second instance court’s imprisonment with prison labor for each one year and six months) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. The Defendant appealed against each of the lower judgment, and this Court rendered a joint decision on each of the appeals cases.

B. In light of the language, legislative intent, etc. of the former part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, where a crime for which judgment has not yet been rendered could not be judged concurrently with the crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, the relationship of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established, but where several crimes for which judgment has not yet become final and conclusive are committed before and after the final and conclusive judgment, it cannot be deemed that Article 38 of the Criminal Act is recognized as concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act among several crimes and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act cannot be deemed to apply, and in this case, a separate sentence shall be imposed for each crime for which judgment has not yet become final and conclusive (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Do469, Mar. 27, 2014; 2010Do469, Mar. 24, 2011; 30 years and one year after the suspended sentence (hereinafter referred to as “the two-year suspended sentence”).

The record of evidence (2015 order 820) 347 pages. However, the crime of fraud against the victim J among the judgment of the court of second instance is based on the crime that ends on May 26, 2012, and is committed before the second conviction becomes final and conclusive. However, the defendant has a first criminal record separate from the second criminal record, and the crime of the second criminal record is committed before the first criminal record becomes final and conclusive, and thus, the crime of the second criminal record is committed before the second criminal record becomes final and conclusive. Thus, the crime of the second criminal record and the crime of the second criminal record against the victim J is first committed.