The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for three months and by imprisonment for four months.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal is that each punishment (for defendant A: 4 months of imprisonment and defendant B: 6 months of imprisonment) against the defendants of the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to Defendant A’s wrongful assertion of sentencing, the Defendant had a record of being punished several times for the same kind of crime, and committed each of the crimes of this case by forging and exercising a mobile phone entry application by using a forged identification card during the period of the same repeated crime and by defrauding multiple cell phones.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes and reflected against the victim of the instant crime, and that the said victim was not subject to the punishment of the Defendant by agreement with the victim of the instant crime, and that the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime including the mobile phone fraud crime during the same period and sentenced to a fine of KRW 330 million, the said judgment became final and conclusive. Each of the instant crimes ought to consider equity in the case of concurrent crimes with the final and conclusive judgment under Article 37 of the Criminal Act, with regard to the relationship between the said final and conclusive judgment and the latter concurrent crimes, and other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, and circumstances leading to the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is unreasonable.

B. As to Defendant B’s wrongful assertion of sentencing, the Defendant had a record of being punished several times for the same type of crime, and committed each of the instant crimes by forging and exercising a mobile phone entry application by using a forged identification card during the period of the same repeated crime and by deceiving a number of cell phones.

However, the defendant's each of the crimes of this case in late late, and the defendant's written agreement was submitted in the name of the victim of the fraud at the time of the trial (the victim expressed his/her intention not to punish the defendant B through the statement in the court below, etc., and submitted his/her written agreement to the court below). Each of the crimes of this case in this case is the occupational embezzlement of the judgment of the court below which became final and conclusive.