The part of the judgment of the court of first instance and that of the judgment of the court of second instance concerning the second crime shall be reversed, respectively.

The defendant is the defendant 1-3 of the judgment of the first instance.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, even though L/C’s statement that purchased a penphone from the Defendant was not reliable.

B. The punishment of the lower court (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 months; imprisonment for 1 year; and fine for 2 million won: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 months; and imprisonment without prison labor for 5 months) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, Article 1-2(1) of the Criminal Act provides that “The crime for which judgment to face with imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment has become final and the crime committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive” constitutes concurrent crimes prescribed in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, a crime for which judgment has not been rendered among concurrent crimes and a crime for which judgment has not been made final and conclusive under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act shall be sentenced to punishment in consideration

Meanwhile, in light of the latter part of Article 37 and the legislative purport of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, where a crime for which judgment has not yet become final and conclusive could not be judged concurrently with the crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, the defendant shall not be sentenced to punishment, or mitigated or exempted from punishment in consideration of equity and equity (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do9295, Sept. 27, 2012, etc.). According to evidence, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for eight months and four months at the Daejeon District Court on May 28, 2014 and two years of suspended sentence on November 27, 2014, and the fact that the judgment became final and conclusive on April 27, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “decision 1”), and the defendant shall be recognized as having been sentenced to imprisonment for fraud from the Seoul District Court on April 2, 2015 to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 10 years and 20 years prior to the date of suspended execution (hereinafter referred to as “the judgment”).

3) Article 39 of the Criminal Act is applicable to the provisional crime No. 1 in its holding. 1.