Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, the defendant case and the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in entirety.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and a fine.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The respective punishments (the first instance court: 6 months of imprisonment and the fine of 300,000 won, and the third instance court: 6 months of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court against Defendant A (the first instance court: 1, 300,000 won, and 6 months of imprisonment) are too unreasonable.

Shed Defendant AC 1’s imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) sentenced by the court below to Defendant AC is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor (or the Defendant A)’s sentence sentenced by the second court to Defendant A (two years of suspended sentence for imprisonment with prison labor for six months) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination (as to Defendant A), prior to determining the grounds for appeal against Defendant A and the prosecutor’s grounds for appeal against Defendant A, the Defendant filed an appeal against both the first and the third judgment, and the prosecutor filed an appeal against the second and the second judgment. The court of the first, second and third judgment decided to hold concurrent hearings, and the court of the first, second and third judgment is in the relation of concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one punishment shall be imposed within the scope of one of the term of punishment imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the first and the second and third judgment against Defendant A among the judgment of the court of the first instance cannot be maintained any more.

3. It is recognized that Defendant AC’s judgment on the grounds for appeal of the instant case committed with Defendant A, in light of the methods and attitudes of each of the instant fraud crimes committed with Defendant A, and the circumstances leading up to the commission of the crime, etc., the nature of the crime is not good, and that it was not agreed with the victims up to the trial, and that only part of the damage was recovered, and that the Defendant had the same criminal record as

However, it seems that the defendant has led to the confession of all of the crimes of this case and the time of reflectiveness through the confinement life for two months, the damage amount of the fraudulent conduct that the defendant conspired with A is relatively small, and the damage amount of the fraudulent conduct has become more than three million won for AE.