We reverse the judgment of the court below.

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by ten months of imprisonment.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The punishment of each judgment of the court below (the first judgment: 6 months of imprisonment and 6 months of imprisonment): imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant before determining ex officio.

This Court held two appeals cases against the defendant jointly and tried by the two original judgments, and since the crime in the decision of each original court is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment shall be sentenced in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the original judgment cannot be maintained any more.

As such, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the following is again decided after pleading.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On February 20, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of suspension of the execution of imprisonment for perjury at the Seoul Central District Court for eight months, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on May 25, 2012. On November 2, 2012, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced four months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 10, 2012.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Around February 27, 2012, the Defendant stated with C that “E” restaurant located near Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, provided that “A is a victim F (32 years of age) and his/her dynamic G,” but C is a victim of “A is a part of a high school, and it is necessary to find a newborn baby in a car manufacturer.” For this purpose, 40 million won is required,” and the Defendant stated that “The Defendant will find employment by working for a high school worship located in the head office of the Gu, Young-gu, Seoul.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to find the victim's birth in the car.

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with C, deceiving the victim as above, and received cash of 2 million won from the victim's occupation to the victim, and around March 2, 2012, in the name of C.