1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years;

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

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

Since the instant crime was committed between December 11, 2009 and September 3, 2010, the lower court omitted the application of the former Criminal Act despite that Article 42 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 10259, Apr. 15, 2010; hereinafter the same applies) applies to the upper limit of imprisonment.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

【Inasmuch as the facts constituting an offense and the summary of evidence recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are as shown in the corresponding column of the judgment below, they shall be quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 3(1)2 of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (amended by Act No. 11304, Feb. 10, 2012); Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act concerning the relevant crime (in addition, the upper limit of the punishment shall be governed by the main sentence of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act)

2. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code to treat concurrent crimes, provided that the crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing in the first part of Article 39(1) does not apply to the crime of this case on which judgment has become final and conclusive in relation to the relation of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Code

1. Three to fifteen years from the date of imprisonment with prison labor for a prison labor within the scope of punishment by law;

2. The crime of this case, which was determined to be sentenced, is a case where the defendant took approximately KRW 2.2 billion from the victim, and the amount of damage is large, and the defendant only fully pays part of the amount acquired by the defrauded, and the damage is not repaid.