All of the first and second original judgments shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

evidence seized in 2020 order 204

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the first instance court: imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months, confiscation, and second instance: imprisonment of 10 months) of the original court is too unreasonable; and

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the defendant appealed against the judgment below, and the court decided to concurrently examine each of the above appeals cases.

However, since each crime of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a single sentence should be sentenced within the scope of the term of punishment imposed under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

In this respect, each judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's allegation of unfair sentencing, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the first and second original judgment, and the subsequent decision is delivered as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the evidence and criminal facts against the defendant recognized by this court and the summary of the evidence are as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 32 of the Criminal Act, Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)3 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for each type of crime;

1. Articles 32(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for aiding and abetting and mitigation;

1. From among concurrent crimes, there are very poor circumstances such as the reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act, the fact that the nature of the crime is not high in light of the circumstances of the crime and the method of the crime, the frequency of the crime and the method of the crime, etc., and the fact that the defendant both led to confession and reflects the crimes in this case.