The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal: Sentencing (a fine of four million won is imposed);

2. Ex officio determination

A. Before determining on the grounds for appeal for omitting the necessary mitigation, the health care unit and the Defendant, as the deaf-mutes of class I with hearing disability, should reduce the punishment for the instant crime.

(Article 11 of the Criminal Act). Nevertheless, the lower court erred by omitting the application of statutes, which led to the failure of the lower judgment to maintain as it is.

B. The misapprehension of the legal principles as to the number of crimes is a single criminal intent to purchase goods from the member stores with the same criminal intent, and the criminal intent is repeated in the same manner, while the criminal intent is pending, and all the damage legal interests of the illegal use of the e-mail card are the same as the safety of transactions using the above e-mail card and the trust of the public, the defendant's act of improper use of the e-mail card constitutes a single crime. Even though the result of the improper use of the e-mail card constitutes a crime of fraud and the crime of unlawful use of the e-mail card constitutes a substantive concurrent relation, even if the e-mail card constitutes a crime of fraud and the crime of unlawful use of the e-mail card constitutes a substantive concurrent relation.

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Do1181 delivered on July 12, 1996, etc.). However, the lower court recognized each of the victims of this case's crime of fraud and violation of the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act, and held that the crime of fraud and the crime of violation of the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act are in a commercial concurrence relationship as prescribed in Article 40

In addition, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

3. Accordingly, the court below's decision is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is decided as follows.

[Discied Reasons for the judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court.