The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing: Imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months and imprisonment for 4 months) of the lower court’s sentence (unfair sentencing: 10 months and imprisonment with prison labor for 2 months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. ① Each crime of the first instance judgment was committed around August 21, 2012. ② The two years imprisonment with prison labor for the Defendant on the grounds of forging securities, etc.; and the three years of suspended execution with prison labor for the Defendant on March 21, 2014. ③ The crime of passing the second instance judgment was committed on February 29, 2016, which was after the said judgment became final and conclusive. As the crime of passing the second instance judgment was committed on February 29, 2016, each crime of passing the first instance judgment is limited to the crime of forging securities of the said final and conclusive judgment and Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and each crime of passing the second instance judgment and the second instance judgment do not constitute concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, even if two appeals cases are combined, there is no reason for ex officio reversal that should be sentenced to one punishment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

B. As to the reasons for appeal by the Defendant, it is favorable to the Defendant that the Defendant led to confession of each of the crimes of this case and reflects the fact that the Defendant is going against.

① However, each of the crimes of this case is disadvantageous to the Defendant, including: (a) the charge of forging a bill using personal trust relationship with D; (b) the preparation of a fair deed; (c) the use of a forged bill or its copy as an objection to a payment order case; (d) the Defendant was sentenced to three years of suspended execution on March 21, 2014 due to the charge of forging securities in 2014; (b) the Defendant repeatedly committed a second-time judgment during the period of suspended execution, which became final and conclusive on March 21, 2014; (c) the Defendant, in addition to the above crime, has been punished six times of a fine; (d) one time of suspended sentence of imprisonment (199; (e) one time of suspended sentence (199; 10 months of imprisonment; 2 years of suspended sentence); (d) the nominal holder D of a promissory note, who wants to be punished by the Defendant in an appellate trial, continuing to submit

The judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance are as follows.