beta
Text
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.
Reasons
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal (2,000,000 won of fine) is too unreasonable.
2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the defendant, the case where "the crime for which a judgment to face with imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment has become final and the crime committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive" constitutes concurrent crimes provided for in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, with respect to a crime which has not been adjudicated among concurrent crimes under Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act, punishment shall be imposed in consideration of equity and the case where the relevant crime
In addition, even if there are a number of crimes for which judgment to be sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment has become final and conclusive, all of the crimes for which judgment has become final and conclusive shall be deemed to be concurrent crimes with the crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Therefore, in this case, a sentence shall be imposed in consideration of equity in cases where all of the crimes for which judgment has become final and conclusive with respect to a crime
(2) According to the records, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Busan District Court on May 29, 2014 and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 26, 2014 (hereinafter “first conviction”), and on September 26, 2014, the same court was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment for a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act (hereinafter “second criminal conviction”), and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 30, 2015 (hereinafter “second criminal conviction”). The crime of this case and the crime of the second criminal offense are all crimes committed between April 4, 2014 and May 12, 2012 and July 13, 2012, and both the crime of this case and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act have become final and conclusive, taking into account the following facts: (a) the crime of equity and the crime of this case have become final and conclusive under the latter part of the Criminal Act.
However, the lower court.