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. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the records show that the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for not less than eight months in this court on November 28, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on April 9, 2015.

Since the crime of fraud and the crime of this case for which judgment has become final and conclusive are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity and equity in cases where judgment is to be rendered at the same time pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows, without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground of the above ex officio reversal.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence against the defendant recognized by this court is as follows: "The defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud in this court on November 28, 2014 and the judgment became final and conclusive on April 9, 2015" in the summary of the evidence, except for adding "1. prosecution and delivery" to the summary of the evidence, and therefore, it is identical to the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of a fine concerning the crime;

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

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is the confession and reflect of the instant crime, the amount of fraud is not significant, and the instant crime is in the relationship between the crime of fraud for which the judgment became final and conclusive on April 9, 2015 and the concurrent crime under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus is equity in the case of concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act.