All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (the first instance court: 6 months of imprisonment, and the second instance court: 6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence No. 1 of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal, this Court decided to hold a joint hearing of the appeal cases against the judgment below. Each of the judgment below against the defendant is in concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence should be imposed within the term of punishment, which increased concurrent crimes in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

3. As such, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Articles 364(2) and 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the above ex officio grounds for reversal of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows after the pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 347-2 and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (an aggravated punishment of concurrent crimes against victims B with heavy criminality) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes is as follows: (a) so-called phishing of the reason for sentencing is highly harmful to the extent that typical organized crimes cause considerable damage to society as a whole; and (b) the life of people is considerably unstable.

In addition, the role of the defendant in committing the crime is very important as a cash withdrawal measure required for the Bosing crime.

In this context, the defendant did not pay damages to the victims in consideration of the fact that he did not do so.