The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The decision of the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the fact that the court below's determination was based on the necessity of the strict punishment of the singishing crime as well as the fact that the nature and circumstances of the crime are not less than those of the singishing crime in light of the method of the crime, it seems that the punishment corresponding to the defendant's liability is necessary.

However, in light of the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime that was denied at the lower court as an initial offender with no criminal history at the lower court; (b) the victim was not punished by the Defendant by solely agreement with the victim; and (c) the amount of profit gained by the Defendant through the instant crime is a relatively small amount compared to the amount of defraudation; and (d) other factors for sentencing indicated in the instant records, such as the Defendant’s age, sex behavior, environment, and circumstances after the instant crime, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows

[Re-written judgment] The facts constituting an offense and the summary of evidence acknowledged by the court below and the summary of the evidence are as follows: except where the court below stated “1. Part of the defendant’s legal statement” in the first instance judgment as “1. The defendant’s legal statement” as “1. The court below’s corresponding column is the same, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment (the point of fraud, the choice of imprisonment, and the punishment), Articles 225 and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of public document) and Articles 229, 225 and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of uttering of forged public document);

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code of Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes;