We reverse the judgment of the court below.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (the second instance judgment)’s punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) by the second instance court is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (the first instance court’s judgment)’s sentence (the imprisonment for four months and the suspension of execution for one year) of the first instance court is deemed to be too unhued and unfair.

2. Before determining the grounds for appeal ex officio, this Court tried ex officio prior to the determination of the grounds for appeal for ex officio determination, and this Court tried by combining the appeal cases of the court below Nos. 1 and 2 against the defendant, and each of the offenses of the judgment below joined in the trial are concurrent offenses under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and as to this, it should be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment increased by concurrent offenses in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment

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

[Discied Judgment] The facts constituting an offense and the summary of evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts constituting an offense and the summary of evidence. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant statutory provisions concerning criminal facts, Article 2 (2) and (1) of the Control of Illegal Check Control Act (the point of default after the issuance of checks), and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud)

1. Among concurrent crimes, the reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act recognize and reflects each of the crimes of this case, and there is no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, and the victim H, G, and F do not want the punishment of the above victims by mutual agreement between the court below and the victim Q and R in the trial.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was issued by the defendant, but the check contract was made.