All of the first and second original judgments shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal Nos. 1 and 2 original judgments (the first original judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and 6 months) are too unreasonable; and

2. We examine the case ex officio, and the defendant filed an appeal against the first and second original judgments, and the appellate court decided to hold a concurrent trial. Each of the crimes of the first and second original judgments against the defendant is related to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single punishment shall be imposed within the scope of the term of punishment increased by concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the first and second original judgments against the defendant cannot be maintained any more.

3. If so, the judgment of the court of final judgment Nos. 1 and 2 is reversed under Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided following the oral argument as follows.

[Discied Judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to each corresponding column of the first and second original judgments, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (Fraud) and the choice of imprisonment for the crime;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. From among concurrent crimes, there are circumstances such as: (a) the fact that the defendant for the reason of sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act recognizes all of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake; and (b) the equity with the case of concurrent judgment with the case of fraud by using computers, etc. as stated in the judgment of the second and the lower court

On the other hand, even though there was a history of punishment for the same crime, the defendant again committed each of the crimes of this case, and did not agree with the victims until the appellate court.