We reverse the judgment of the court below.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Nos. 1 through 23, 28 through 30, of seized evidence.

1. The punishment of the first instance judgment (a year of imprisonment and confiscation) and the punishment of the second instance judgment (a year of imprisonment with prison labor and a April) against the accused as to the summary of the reasons for appeal shall be too unreasonable;

2. Ex officio determination, the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2, and this court decided to consolidate the above two appeals cases. The crimes of the court Nos. 1 and 2 with respect to the defendant are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2 cannot be maintained as they are.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the judgment of the court below is reversed without examining the defendant's unfair argument about sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the judgment of the court below is the same as each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 49 (4) 1, Article 6 (3) 1, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the transfer of each approaching medium as indicated in the first instance judgment), Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of each fraud), Article 49 (4) 1, and Article 6 (3) 1 (the transfer of any approaching medium as indicated in the second instance judgment) of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act concerning criminal facts; and each choice of imprisonment;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (only between violations of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act in the judgment of the first instance);

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 and 2 of the Confiscation Criminal Act is that the nature of the crime is not good in light of each of the criminal methods of this case. The defendant has several records of punishment including fines due to the same kind of crime; the damage to the crime of fraud was not recovered; the damage to the crime was not agreed with the victim; on the other hand, the defendant was actually gained from the criminal act.