The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes listed in [Attachment 1] through 78] in the table of crime committed against the Defendant.

1. In light of the fact that the defendant is against the gist of the grounds for appeal, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Crimes for which judgment of ex officio or higher punishment has become final and the crimes committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive shall constitute concurrent crimes provided for in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, punishment shall be imposed in consideration of equity in cases where a crime among concurrent crimes provided for in Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act and a crime for which judgment has not become final and conclusive are concurrently adjudicated

In addition, when there is a final and conclusive judgment sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment for other crimes in several middle of crimes, the relationship of concurrent crimes should be prevented at the time of the final and conclusive judgment, so two punishment should be sentenced.

According to the records, the Defendant was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor and 2 years of suspended execution, community service work 200 hours, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on April 26, 2008, in the vice branch of the Daegu District Court on April 18, 2008.

Therefore, among the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, the facts constituting the crime listed in the annexed Table 1 through 78, which was committed before the above judgment became final, are related to the crime for which the above judgment became final and the crime for which the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is concurrent crimes. Thus, the court below should have sentenced one punishment in consideration of equity between the crimes in the annexed Table 1 through 78, which were not adjudicated under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act and the crime in the annexed Table 79 through 81, which was committed by the defendant after the above judgment became final and conclusive.

However, the court below sentenced one punishment by admitting that both the above facts of the crime are concurrent crimes.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

3. If so, the judgment of the court below is based on the above reasons for reversal.