The judgment below

The remainder, excluding the part of the application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding 1) On January 10, 201, the victim obtained KRW 4.7 billion from the bank account in the name of the victim where the right of deception was established by depositing the amount of KRW 4.7 billion into the bank account in the name of the victim, and received KRW 150 million under the name of the victim. Since the promise was implemented, the Defendant did not deceive the victim. (2) On March 9, 2011, the part of KRW 50 million out of the defraudedation of KRW 200 million was remitted to the account under the name of the Defendant’s father around March 9, 2011, the victim was not in the name of KRW 50 million, which was remitted from the Defendant’s wife to the account under the name of the Defendant’s father.

3) On or around March 9, 201 and around the 14th day of the same month, the Defendant believed and delivered to the victim the horses, such as I and M, that if the Defendant, by preparing KRW 30 billion, 30 million and depositing in a bank, he may bring about KRW 60 billion of the underground funds of the Bank of Korea, if the Defendant deposited in the bank. Therefore, the Defendant did not have any criminal intent to defraudation. (b) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Determination 1 ex officio: “The crime for which a judgment to face with imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment has become final and the crime committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive” constitutes concurrent crimes stipulated in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, with respect to a crime for which judgment has not been rendered among concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, a sentence shall be imposed in consideration of the equity between the crime and the crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive at the same time. Furthermore, even if there are multiple crimes for which judgment to face imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment has become final and conclusive, all of the crimes for which judgment has become final and conclusive and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act are concurrent crimes. Therefore, a sentence shall be imposed in consideration of equity among all the crimes for which judgment has become final and conclusive (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do12911, Dec. 27, 2012).