The part concerning the crime of Articles 2 and 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed, respectively.

The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment (two months of imprisonment, three years and six months of imprisonment) of the judgment of the court of first instance and the punishment (four months of imprisonment) of the judgment of the court of second instance is too unreasonable.

B. The form of the judgment of the court of first instance by the prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the court of original judgment, Nos. 1 and 2 sentenced the Defendant to each conviction after having separately examined the Defendant. The Defendant appealed all the judgment of the court of first instance against the judgment of the court of first instance, and the prosecutor appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance. The court of first instance decided to concurrently examine the above two appeals cases.

Therefore, the first instance court's judgment with respect to the defendant shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of punishment imposed by Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, since both crimes of Articles 2 and 3 of the first instance court's judgment and the second instance court's judgment with respect to the defendant are concurrent crimes under Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the court below's decision

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s allegation of unreasonable sentencing on the first offense part of the judgment of the court of first instance is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is to be examined.

B. The Defendant’s crime of this part of the judgment of the court below on the allegation of unfair sentencing regarding the part on the first crime of the judgment of the court of first instance is likely to be more severe punishment in light of the following: (a) the Defendant, having been in office as the secretary of the Seoul Association of the D Association, forged various agreements, etc.; and (b) used them as a means of deceiving the victim networkF by exercising this right; (c) the nature of the crime is not easy; and (d) the amount of damage therefrom is large; and (e) up to now,

However, the defendant.