All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

, however, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The punishment (the first judgment: the imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months and the second judgment of the original court: the imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months) of each judgment of the original court on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, this Court decided to consolidate each appeal case against the judgment of the court below. Since the first and second judgments of the court below found the defendant guilty in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the separate punishment like the first and second judgments of the court below cannot be punished, and the punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained in this respect.

3. If so, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio under Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without examining the defendant's grounds for appeal on unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed ex officio, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding column of the first and second judgments of the court below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Articles 347(1) and 355(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud), the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Considering the following grounds for sentencing) of the suspended sentence;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the defendant did not have a criminal record except for a fine of KRW 300,000,000, and his depth reflects the crime of this case, the defendant paid part of the amount of damage and the victims do not want the punishment of the defendant in consultation with the victims, and the