The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal 1) The Defendant had mental and physical loss or mental weakness due to mental illness at the time of committing each of the instant crimes.

2) The punishment of the lower court (the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and the second instance court: a fine of KRW 5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

The Court held that each appeal case against the judgment of the court below was consolidated and tried, and that among the judgment of the court below, each of the offenses against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one punishment shall be sentenced pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal

Therefore, all of the judgment below can not be maintained.

In addition, according to Article 5-4 (5) 1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which is a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which is a crime of the second offense of the 2016 highest order 2792 case in the judgment of the first instance court, the statutory punishment is imprisonment with prison labor for not less than two years but not more than 20 years. Thus, in order to sentence a criminal defendant to imprisonment with prison labor for less than two years, a small amount of punishment should be mitigated pursuant to Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act.

However, the lower court, without reducing the amount, sentenced the Defendant to one year and six months of imprisonment without prison labor, and accordingly, erred by sentencing a sentence lower than the lower limit of statutory penalty.

However, although there are reasons for reversal of authority above, the defendant's argument such as mental disorder is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

3. According to the record of determination as to the assertion of mental disorder, etc., the Defendant was found to have suffered from mental illness caused by the symptoms of flat scam, but in light of the process leading to the crime, the method and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the crimes in this case.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

In addition, the defendant's crime No. 3 cases in the judgment of the first instance.