The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., indubly unfair) argues that the Defendant’s imprisonment with prison labor of the lower court is too unreasonable, and that the prosecutor is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. In full view of the arguments in the instant case and the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, career, health status, and power of family relationship, the lower court’s punishment seems to be unreasonable because it appears that the Defendant’s assertion on unreasonable sentencing is reasonable, and the Prosecutor’s assertion on this issue is without merit.

3. The judgment below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following decision is rendered after pleading, as the defendant's appeal is with merit.

(3) Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that “If an appeal by a defendant is reversed on the ground that the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the appeal by the prosecutor shall not be dismissed in separate order).” (Reasons for multi-use judgment) Criminal facts and summary of evidence, the facts constituting an offense recognized by the court and summary of evidence are as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles 347(1) (Fraud) and 356, 355(1) (the point of occupational embezzlement), 231, 234, and 231 (the point of uttering of private document) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;