The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be exempted from punishment.

1. The Defendant did not submit the grounds for appeal ex officio.

In light of the records, the defendant, who was sentenced on November 29, 2012 by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months with prison labor for a crime of fraud in Sung-nam branch of the Suwon District Court on March 6, 2012, may be recognized as having become final and conclusive on March 6, 2012. The crime of fraud and assault in this case, for which judgment has become final and conclusive, are in a concurrent crime under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and is in a concurrent relationship under the latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and determines punishment after considering equity and examining whether to reduce or exempt

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts and evidence admitted by this court is to add "criminal facts" to all the facts of "criminal facts" as stated in the judgment of the court below, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on March 6, 2012, with the exception of adding "1.0 criminal records: each judgment of the court below and each case agreement assistant body" to "the summary of the evidence" to "the summary of the evidence" as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and it is to be cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act, since it is the same as stated in each corresponding column of the court below.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes;

1. The latter part of Article 39(1) of the Exempted Criminal Act (In light of the timing, content, degree of damage and sentence of fraud for which this judgment has become final and conclusive, and the timing, content, method and degree of damage of the instant crime, even if the instant crime was judged simultaneously with the crime for which the said judgment became final and conclusive, considering the fact that even if the said judgment concurrently ruled that the punishment would not have been aggravated, it appears that the said judgment would have been more aggravated