All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and eight months.

Nos. 1 through 3 of seized evidence.

1. A prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal filed an appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance on the grounds that the above punishment of the court of first instance (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unfluent and unreasonable, and the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance on the grounds that the above punishment of the court of first instance (one year and six months of imprisonment of the court of first instance, and eight months of imprisonment of the court of second instance) is too unreasonable.

2. Before making judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor and the defendant, the relationship between each of the crimes in the judgment of the court below of this case is one concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and as long as this court conducts a joint examination, the defendant should be sentenced to one punishment for each of the crimes under Article 38 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for ex officio reversal and the defendant's respective arguments on unfair sentencing, and it is again decided following the oral argument as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by this court is as follows: (a) the second instance court’s judgment’s correction of “in January 12, 2013,” “in January 12, 2013,” “in January 11, 2013,” “in January 12, 2013,” and (b) the second and fifth reduction’s “the same day,” respectively, “in January 25, 2013, 17:50,” and except for the addition of “investigative Report (the monetary details analysis) lawfully adopted and examined in the trial in the summary of the evidence,” it is identical to each corresponding part of the lower court’s judgment, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

(a) The occupation of official document assistance: Article 225 of the Criminal Act; and

(b) The point of private document assistance: Article 231 of the Criminal Act; and

(c) The occupation of uttering of forged official documents: Articles 229 and 225 of the Criminal Act;

D. The occupation of the event of the above investigation document: Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Code.