The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

6,000,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

1. In light of the substance of the grounds for appeal in this case, the punishment (two months of imprisonment and additional collection) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Aggravation of repeated crime provided for in Article 35 of the Criminal Act for ex officio determination: “A person who commits a crime equivalent to or greater than imprisonment without prison labor within three years after having been sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment, or after having been sentenced to the completion of or exemption from the execution of the sentence.” In the case of the defendant, a repeated crime may be aggravated only for the crime committed from July 11, 2007 to July 10, 201. The crime of violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act, which ends on July 20, 2010, among the criminal facts of this case, is not deemed to have been committed within the repeated crime

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio as to the violation of the Attorney-at-Law in addition to the crime committed by the defendant during the period of repeated crime.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is ruled as follows through pleading.

[Dao-written judgment] The criminal facts against the defendant recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are as stated in the corresponding column of each judgment of the court below, and thus, they are cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act (a point of fraud), Article 111 of the Attorney-at-Law Act (a point of receiving money and valuables under the name of trust), and the choice

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes (with respect to fraud)

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

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act are that the defendant partly paid damages and agreed with some victims, some of the received money is used for relevant work such as permission, and the defendant is against his fault.