The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant;

A. The lower court, on September 23, 2015, sentenced the Defendant to one year’s imprisonment with prison labor for fraud at the Suwon Friwon, and instead of combining the instant case, rendered a separate judgment on October 15, 2015, by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant’s punishment against the Defendant ought to be exempted in consideration of equity in the case of a judgment at the same time with the case of fraud, which was sentenced to one year of imprisonment at the Suwon Friwon on September 23, 2015, the sentence of the lower court that sentenced a fine of KRW 1,00,000 is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the reasons for ex officio appeal ex officio prior to the determination of the reasons for appeal.

According to the records, on August 14, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to nine months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Suwon Friwon, and such judgment (hereinafter “final judgment No. 1”) became final and conclusive on January 16, 2015, and the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for a crime of fraud committed prior to the date of final and conclusive judgment No. 1 in the same court on September 23, 2015, and the final and conclusive judgment on November 24, 2015 (hereinafter “final judgment”) may be recognized.

However, since each of the crimes of this case is in conflict with the crimes of the first and second final judgment and the crime of the second final judgment under Article 37 of the Criminal Act, punishment shall be determined in consideration of equity in cases where all of the above crimes are adjudicated at the same time under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the judgment of the court below that sentenced punishment in consideration of equity in cases where each of the crimes of this case and the first final judgment are adjudicated simultaneously at the same time, cannot be maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, even if there is a ground for ex officio reversal.

B. The lower court’s judgment on the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine is each of the crimes of fraud of this case and the final judgment of No. 2.