All appeals by the defendant against the judgment below are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the first instance judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, and the second instance judgment: the fine of 2 million won) declared by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the language, legislative intent, etc. of the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act as to ex officio reversal following the combination of appellate trials, if a crime not yet adjudicated cannot be judged concurrently with the crime for which judgment became final and conclusive, the relation of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act cannot be established, and it is reasonable to interpret that the sentence shall not be imposed or the sentence shall not be mitigated or exempted in consideration of equity with the case where a judgment is to be rendered

On the other hand, Article 38 of the Criminal Act is not applicable to several crimes which have not yet been adjudicated before and after the final judgment became final and conclusive, since there is no final and conclusive judgment on the grounds that the crimes committed before and after the final and conclusive judgment cannot be judged concurrently with the crimes for which the final and conclusive judgment became final and conclusive, among several crimes, the relation of concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is recognized and Article 38 of the Criminal Act is not applicable.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do469, Mar. 27, 2014), the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Busan District Court on May 30, 2018 and became final and conclusive on December 25, 2018.

Therefore, in relation to the above crime and the crime of fraud for which judgment has become final and conclusive, a punishment shall be imposed on the crime as stated in the judgment of the second instance in consideration of equity and equity, etc. in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, since the crime and the crime committed by the above defendant prior to the final and conclusive judgment and the crime committed after the final and conclusive judgment of the first instance in the judgment of the court below cannot be recognized as concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.