The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal appealed from the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment) to be too unreasonable, and the prosecutor appealed from the lower court’s punishment to be too unfluent and unfair.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant and prosecutor prior to the judgment.

According to the statement of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and the summary information of the case, the defendant was sentenced on November 18, 2009 to a suspended sentence of two years on November 26, 2009 for criminal fraud in the Gwangju District Court's Netcheon Branch of the Gwangju District Court sentenced on November 18, 200 to a suspended sentence of one year and six months, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on November 26, 2009. The criminal facts against the defendant were in the relation of concurrent crimes with the crime for which punishment becomes final and the crime for which punishment becomes final and the group is established after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment for the crime of this case is determined in consideration of equity in the case where judgment is

3. The judgment of the court below, on the ground that the above reasons for reversal exist ex officio, is without examining the unfair argument of sentencing between the defendant and the prosecutor. In accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the following is again decided after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the evidence and the facts charged by this court and the summary of the evidence are as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except for adding "(i) the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on November 18, 2009 to imprisonment of one year and six months for fraud from the Gwangju District Court's Net Branch of the Gwangju District Court sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and six months on November 26, 2009, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on November 26, 2009" in the summary of the evidence as stated in the summary of the evidence, and therefore, it is identical to the statement in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code to treat concurrent crimes, but the reason for sentencing in the first sentence of Article 39(1) is that the amount obtained by deceit of the crime of this case is not much specified, and the crime is investigated into the same crime of fraud.