The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Three years of imprisonment with prison labor for each of the crimes of 2019, 350, 2020, and 26 in the judgment of the defendant.

The grounds for appeal are too unreasonable that each sentence of the lower court (the 2019 Highly 350, 2020 Highly 26: Imprisonment with prison labor for 4 years, etc., and 2020 Highly 38: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the ex officio determination records on the part of the case 2020 high-level38 (which refers to the evidence records of 2019 high-level350 case. 421 pages, 431-443 pages), the defendant was sentenced on October 19, 2013 to two years of suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for one year at the Ulsan District Court on October 11, 2013 and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 19, 2013; (2) on November 18, 2016, the Busan District Court sentenced the defendant to one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes Act (dokju vehicle) and the defendant was sentenced to two years and two months of imprisonment with prison labor at the Busan District Court on the same day (which means the evidence records of 2015No2936, 4630), and the date and time of the crime are all ① since the judgment became final and conclusive, it does not conflict with the latter part of Article 387 of the Criminal Act.

In February 9, 2017, the judgment was finalized on February 9, 2017 (2015No3373), and (2) Each crime committed before the final judgment is known.

Therefore, among the judgment below of the defendant, the crime of fraud in the part of the case of 2020 Gohap38 (hereinafter in this paragraph “the crime of this case”) and the crime for which each of the above judgments has become final and conclusive are all concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the crime of this case and the crime for which each of the above judgments has become final and conclusive in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act

However, the court below explained only the previous convictions in the part on the "compactary treatment" and the part on "the grounds for both punishment" among the "application of statutes."

Therefore, the court below cannot be deemed to have sentenced to punishment for the crime of this case by taking into account equity and the case where each of the above judgments was rendered simultaneously pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. The court below's measure is a legal principle as to latter concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act.