The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three months.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records of this case’s judgment ex officio, the Defendant, at the Seoul Central District Court on January 13, 2017, was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of fraud and on January 21, 2017, and did not file an appeal, and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 21, 2017.

As above, in the crime of fraud for which judgment has become final and conclusive and the crime of this case in relation to concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, punishment should be imposed in consideration of equity in the case where judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to the main sentence of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, so the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of facts and evidence recognized by this court is that "the defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul Central District Court on March 31, 2016 and the judgment was finalized on April 8, 2016.

“The Defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Seoul Central District Court on March 31, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on April 8, 2016. On January 13, 2017, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced the Defendant to one year and two months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Seoul Central District Court on January 21, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 21, 2017.

With the exception of adding “1. Court rulings and case search details” to “a summary of evidence” at the last part of “a summary of the evidence,” it is identical to each corresponding column of the lower judgment, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code to treat concurrent crimes, but the sentencing of Article 39(1) is recognized and against the Defendant, and the victim is punished by the Defendant.