The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal prior to the judgment.

The Defendant appealed solely on the ground that the sentencing was unfair, and led to the conviction, and led to the confession of the instant crime against the Defendant. As to the crime of forging private documents against D on which the Defendant filed a complaint, a decision not to institute a prosecution was rendered, and the judgment became final and conclusive as the trial procedure was not initiated, the Defendant ought to be mitigated or exempted from punishment as necessary pursuant to Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Do7293, Aug. 1, 2018). Accordingly, the lower judgment became impossible to maintain as it is.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

[Re-written judgment] Criminal facts and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court and the summary of the evidence are as stated in the corresponding column of the original judgment, except for the addition of "the defendant's oral statement at the trial" to the summary of the evidence, and thus, they are cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 156 of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. The crime of false reasoning for sentencing under Articles 157, 153, and 55(1)3 (Confession) of the Criminal Act of statutory mitigation is a serious crime that interferes with the State’s right to receive permission and the appropriate exercise of jurisdiction as well as interferes with the proper exercise of jurisdiction, and causes the risk of suffering from criminal punishment. The defendant must strictly punish the defendant. The defendant purchased the effective capital fromO and embezzled the PC equivalent to KRW 34 million from the defendant by arbitrarily disposing of the PC in the amount of KRW 34 million.