The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the assertion of double prosecution

A. Where the same case is pending in several courts which share the same jurisdiction, the court which received the public prosecution first shall judge (the main sentence of Article 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act; hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and the other court shall decide to dismiss the public prosecution if it confirms that the same case was first prosecuted.

(Article 328(1)3 of the Act). In addition, in the case of changes in indictment, the time when the indictment is instituted shall be determined as of the time when the initial indictment was instituted, and it shall not be determined as of the time of changes in indictment.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Do2939 delivered on October 11, 2002, etc.). B.

The judgment below

According to the reasoning and the record, among the facts charged in the instant case, the facts charged that “the Defendant, on May 8, 2013, by deceiving the victim on May 8, 2013, 102 and 702, obtained KRW 30,000 from the victim for the repair cost of Nowon-gu, Busan (hereinafter “the part of the repair cost of this case”) and the facts charged in the fraudulent case of Busan District Court 2014DaMa518, May 9, 2013, “the Defendant, by deceiving the victim AO on May 9, 2013, by deceiving the victim from the damage apartment, acquired KRW 30,00 for the use of Nowon-gu and repair cost” (hereinafter “related facts charged”), can be seen as the same in full view of the following circumstances.

Furthermore, according to the records, the part of the acquisition of the repair cost of this case was first prosecuted on July 11, 2013 with the Busan District Court's Dong Branch, and the indictment was changed on the date of January 10, 2014 by the court below.