The judgment below

Among them, the part of each of the crimes against Defendant A and the part against Defendant B of the 2017 Highest 1031 case.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants [each of the offenses in the case of Defendant A (the first instance court Decision 2016, the second instance court Decision 2016, the second instance court Decision 2017, the second instance court Decision 2017: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and each offense in the second instance court decision 1031: 6 months), Defendant B, and C (each fine of KRW 10 million)] is too unreasonable.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court on June 22, 2017, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by Defendant B, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment for fraud at the Ulsan District Court on September 8, 2017 and the Defendant appealed to the same court on September 8, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 16, 2017. As such, the first criminal facts entered in the judgment of the lower court and the crime of fraud, which became final and conclusive on September 16, 2017, are both concurrent crimes with the crime of this case committed prior to the final and conclusive judgment and the crime of this case committed on September 16, 2017 after Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the Defendant should simultaneously be sentenced to the punishment of this case in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment is rendered at the same time pursuant to the main sentence of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

3. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. Defendant A1) The Defendant, each of the crimes of the 2016 Highest 4579 Highest 2016 Highest 777 Highest 2017 Highest 2017 Highest 777, expressed an attitude against each of these crimes.

On November 7, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence on one-year imprisonment for a crime of fraud, and the said judgment was finalized on November 15, 2014. Since each part of the crimes against victims is in the relation of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the crime of fraud for which judgment has become final and conclusive, each part of the crimes against victims is in the relation of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment should be determined in consideration of equity with the case where judgment is

The defendant repaid 3 million won to U.S. interest to the victim, and the victim N agreed to cancel the complaint against the defendant.

On the other hand, however,