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 main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (2 million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

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

According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the trial court, the defendant was sentenced on April 26, 2017 by the Seoul Eastern District Court to the crime of fraud, the crime of embezzlement, and the crime of embezzlement, and the judgment became final and conclusive on April 27, 2017. Thus, the defendant's crime of this case in the relation of concurrent crimes between the crime subject to the above final and conclusive judgment and the crime subject to the latter after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, shall be determined after considering the equity between the case to be judged at the same time pursuant to Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act and the case to be mitigated or exempted.

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

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the following is again decided after pleading.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of the facts constituting an offense and evidence admitted by this court is as follows: “The Defendant was sentenced on April 26, 2017 by the Seoul Eastern District Court to be punished on the charge of fraud and embezzlement of deserted Articles, and the judgment became final and conclusive on April 27, 2017” in the first head of the facts constituting an offense of the lower judgment; and “1..................., inquiries such as criminal history, etc., inquiry of case summary information, and the Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2016 High Court Decision 4254 Decided April 4, 201,” and the summary of the evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the lower court’s judgment. As such, it is cited as it is in accordance with

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud), Articles 352 and 347(1) (the point of attempted fraud) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of fines for the crime;

1. The first sentence of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the treatment of concurrent crimes: Provided, That the first sentence of Article 37 (1);

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code of Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes;