Of the first judgment, the part of the crime No. 7 through No. 22 is the first judgment of the court of first instance.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In regard to the Defendant (the first instance court and the second instance court, on the grounds of unfair sentencing), the sentence imposed by the lower court (the crime from No. 1 to No. 1 6: imprisonment of two months, the first instance court’s imprisonment of two months, the first instance court’s imprisonment of two years, the first instance court’s imprisonment of two years, the second instance court’s imprisonment of no. 7 to 22, and the second instance court’s imprisonment of no. 1: the second instance court’s imprisonment of eight months and the second instance court’s suspension of execution of sentence of two years) is too unreasonable.

B. As to the crime of the first instance court against the first instance court of the first instance, the punishment imposed on the crime of the first instance court of the second instance of the 2013 Godan37 and the first instance court of the 2013 Godan37 and the crime of the first instance of the 2013 Godan37 and the crime of the second instance of the 2013 Godan38 and the punishment sentenced on the crime of the 2013 Godan37 are unreasonable. 2) The crime of the second instance judgment of the 2nd instance court of the 2nd instance (legal scenario and unreasonable sentencing) is deemed to be too uneasible during the period of repeated crime, and thus, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence despite being disqualified for the suspended sentence. In light of the amount of the false tax invoice and the criminal records of the Defendant, it is unreasonable that the second instance judgment of the 2nd

2. Ex officio determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal above, the above court rendered a judgment as above after examining the defendant separately, and the defendant filed an appeal against each judgment of the court below, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings of the above two appeals. Among the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant, each of the crimes of No. 7 and No. 2013 and no. 38 and each of the crimes of No. 2013 and no. 38 of the judgment of the court of second instance among the judgment of the court of first instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, one of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is to be sentenced within the scope of punishment imposed for concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.