The remainder of the judgment of the court below, excluding the dismissal of an application for compensation order and compensation order, and Article 2.

1. The main points of the grounds for appeal are as follows: The punishment of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the first and second judgment was rendered on the Defendant’s grounds of unfair sentencing, and the Defendant appealed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. This court decided to concurrently examine the above two appeals cases.

However, since each crime recognized by the court of original judgment against the defendant is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment should be sentenced in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed without examining the defendant's respective arguments of unfair sentencing, and the remaining parts of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding the rejection of an order for compensation and an order for compensation among the judgment of the court of first instance ex officio pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment of the court of second instance is

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and the summary of evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts constituting the crime and the summary of evidence in the court below's judgment as stated in the corresponding column of the court below's judgment 1 and 2. Thus, they are quoted as it is in accordance with

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (main sentence for each victim), the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the reason for sentencing as prescribed in the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (aggravating concurrent crimes with the punishment stipulated in the crime of fraud against victim B with the largest amount of crime) is that the defendant does not repeat again, and that part of the damage has been recovered within the said scope by returning a part of the money obtained by the defendant, which is favorable to the defendant.