All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the judgment of the court below rendered on the defendant is too unreasonable (the court below's judgment No. 1: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and the court below's judgment No. 2: imprisonment for a year and two months).

2. We examine ex officio the appeal ex officio, and the defendant filed each appeal against the judgment of the court below, and examined the appeal case in the first instance court. However, as long as each crime of the judgment of the court below revealed by the judgment of the court below is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance should be sentenced to a single punishment. Thus, the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be maintained any more.

3. As such, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed in entirety, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud), Articles 356 and 355(1) (the point of occupational embezzlement) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act that aggravated concurrent crimes is the crime of embezzlement of the money in custody of livestock products or their sales proceeds by obtaining entrustment sale from the defendant, etc.

The number of victims due to each crime of this case reaches six, and the amount of damage exceeds 400 million won.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflected it, and paid part of the amount of the acquired money to the victim.

In addition, the livestock products that the defendant acquired by fraud.