The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Of the facts charged in the instant case.

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the progress records of the instant case.

A. The Defendant was indicted for a violation of the presidential emergency measures (hereinafter “Emergency Measures No. 9”) for the national security and the protection of public order, and for fraud, and the Defendant was convicted of both the charges against the Defendant on September 16, 197, by applying subparagraph 9(1) and subparagraph 7(7) of the Emergency Measures No. 9 (Emergency Measures No. 9) and Article 347 of the Criminal Act, respectively, and sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment for one year and six months and suspension of qualifications for one year and six months.

B. The prosecutor and the defendant appealed against it, and the Seoul High Court reversed the judgment of the court below on December 28, 197 on the grounds that the sentencing of the court below was unfair due to the lack of sentencing, and again convicted the defendant of each of the above charges, and sentenced him for one year of imprisonment and suspension of qualification for the defendant by applying the same legislation as the court below (hereinafter “the judgment subject to a retrial”) (hereinafter “ judgment subject to a retrial”).

On December 28, 1977, the defendant renounced a final appeal and the decision subject to a final judgment became final and conclusive as is.

(d)

Since the Emergency Measure No. 9 of December 29, 2017 is unconstitutional, a prosecutor is found to have grounds for retrial prescribed in Article 420 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act in the judgment subject to a final judgment that declared a conviction on the grounds of such invalidation.

In accordance with Article 424 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the court filed a petition for review.

E. The instant court rendered a decision to commence a new trial on July 11, 2018 on the ground that only the violation of Emergency Decree No. 9 among the criminal facts in the judgment subject to a new trial was committed, but the part of fraud was also concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and that one sentence was sentenced in the judgment subject to a new trial. The said decision became final and conclusive as the lapse of the filing period.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Punishment sentenced by the prosecutor (a year and six months of imprisonment and a year of suspension of qualification).