The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below rendered is too unreasonable to impose a fine of 500,000 won.

2. According to the records of ex officio destruction, the Defendant, at the Daegu District Court on July 12, 201, can be found to have been sentenced to imprisonment for one year to three years of suspension of execution and 160 hours of community service, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 24, 201.

Since the crime of this case is related to the crime subject to the above final judgment and the crime subject to the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity in the case of concurrent judgment pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Since the application of the statutes of the lower judgment was omitted, the reason for ex

Pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and the following judgment shall be rendered again after pleading

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting a crime and evidence admitted by this court is as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except for adding "the defendant was sentenced to three years of suspended execution and 160 hours of community service work at the Daegu District Court on July 12, 201, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on November 24, 201," to the first head of the facts constituting a crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, except for adding "the defendant was sentenced to three years of suspended execution and 160 hours of community service work at the Daegu District Court on July 12

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014).

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the order of provisional payment is that the defendant deceivings the victim who operates a telecommunications company's agency as he/she will open his/her cell phone without the intention and ability to open his/her cell phone and thus, his/her market price is approximately KRW 8