No. 1-A of the judgment of the first instance;

(b) d.

All of the judgment of the court below on crimes, crimes of paragraphs 2 and 3 and the second judgment.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because all of the following punishments imposed by the defendant are too unreasonable:

Criminal facts

Decision 1-C of the original judgment of the court of first instance

On November 18, 201, the judgment (criminal power) which became final and conclusive four months of imprisonment with prison labor, which was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor and two years of suspended execution in the Incheon District Court on November 18, 201 and became final and conclusive on November 26, 201. The judgment of the first instance court is set forth in the judgment of the first instance;

(b) d.

3 months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes of No. 2 and No. 3 of the judgment of the second court;

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio determination following the combination, this Court decided to hold a concurrent hearing of each appeal case against the first and second original judgment. As seen earlier, the first and first original judgment against the defendant is rendered.

(b) d.

The crimes of crimes, crimes of Articles 2, 3 and 2 of the judgment of the court of the second instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment shall be imposed with a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment for concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, Article 1 of the judgment of the court of the first instance is applicable

(b) d.

The judgment of the second court on the crimes, crimes, crimes of 2 and 3 and the second judgment cannot be maintained any more.

(3) The Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is based on the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing on the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing (limited to the part on the crime No. 1-C. of the judgment of the court of first instance, which is not related to each of the above crimes; (b) the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing (limited to the part on the crime No. 1-C. of the judgment of the court of first instance). However, although the crime of this case was established, the amount of fraud exceeds 20 million won; (c) the Defendant agreed with the victim or failed to complete the recovery of damage until the trial; and (d) other Defendant’s age, character and conduct, circumstances leading to the instant crime, and result thereof, and other various sentencing conditions indicated in