All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the judgment of the court below rendered against the defendant is too unreasonable (the first judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and the second judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months).

2. We examine ex officio the appeal ex officio, and the defendant filed each appeal against the judgment of the court below, and examined the appeal case in the first instance court. However, as long as each crime of the judgment of the court below on the market is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below should be rendered at the same time and a sentence should be imposed. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

3. As such, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed in entirety, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment (elective of imprisonment);

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes stipulated in the crime of fraud against the largest C) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes (an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes), despite the fact that the Defendant had been punished several times, including punishment for the same kind of crime, has been repeatedly committed each of the instant crimes.

The method of deception is not good and the victims' damage was not completely recovered.

However, the order is based on the favorable circumstances such as the defendant's acknowledgement of the crime of this case and the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, and all other factors of sentencing, including the circumstances after the crime.