The judgment below

Part 1-A and part 3 of the judgment, and part 1-B, C, D and 2 of the judgment, respectively.

1. The reasons for appeal (the crime No. 1 and No. 3 as indicated in the judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months, the crime No. 1-b, (c), (d) and (2) as indicated in the judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months, and the crime No. 4 as indicated in the judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months) is too unreasonable;

2. Determination

A. Ex officio determination (the crime No. 1-A and the part concerning the crime No. 3) is examined ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

"A crime for which judgment to face with imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment has become final and a crime committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive" shall constitute concurrent crimes prescribed in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, a punishment shall be imposed in consideration of equity in cases where a crime among concurrent crimes has become final and conclusive under Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act and a crime for which judgment has not become final and conclusive

According to the records, not only a crime of fraud which became final and conclusive on April 26, 2013 of the judgment, but also a crime of fraud which became final and conclusive on September 12, 2015 of the judgment, but also a crime of fraud on September 26, 2015 of the judgment below, which takes into account the equity with the case where the judgment becomes final and conclusive on April 26, 2013 at the same time with the case where the judgment becomes final and conclusive on April 26, 2013 of the judgment of the court below, which takes into account the equity with the case where the judgment becomes final and conclusive

B. Determination on the Reasons for Appeal 1) under the favorable circumstances such as the confession of and reflect against the crime as to the crime as to the crime as set forth in No. 1-B, C, D, and the crime as set forth in the Decision 1-2, and the fact that the victim AF reached the first instance trial and reached an agreement on the repayment of damage to the victim AF, there is a history of punishment for the same kind of crime, the crime committed during the period of suspended execution, the total amount of KRW 230 million from many victims, and the nature of the crime is not negligible, and the fact that the victim acquired the victim's total sum of KRW 230,000,00 from the victims and did not reach an agreement, the court below's punishment is too too difficult, taking into account all other factors such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment