The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months for the crime of fraud against the victim H.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the first crime in the original judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, suspended execution for 2 years, and No. 2 of the original judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months) is excessively unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal for ex officio, and the facts charged of this case is about the same year from June 8, 2009, by deceiving the defendant to the victim He, by deceiving the victim He, and by deceiving the victim K (hereinafter “victim K”) around September 14, 2007.

7. Until February 2, 200, by taking account of the relationship between the crime of fraud against victim H and the crime of fraud that became final and conclusive on May 21, 2009, the court below applied the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act and applied the former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1) and 38(2), and 50 of the Criminal Act again to engage in concurrent crimes.

However, since the crime of fraud against the victim H and the crime of fraud against the victim K are separately determined due to the above crime which became final and conclusive, it is not in a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, but in a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. On five occasions, the crime of fraud against the victim K who defrauded the main supplies through five times constitutes a single criminal intent, and the victim is the same and the victim constitutes a single comprehensive crime, so there is

Nevertheless, as the court below committed an error of aggravation of concurrent crimes, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows, after hearing.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged by the court and the summary of the evidence is the same as the corresponding column of the original judgment, and thus, it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.