All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 6,000,000.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the original judgment (the first instance judgment: the fine of KRW 4.5 million, the fine of KRW 2 million: the fine of KRW 2.00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. The court of the first instance decided to hold a joint hearing of each appeal case against the defendant by combining all appeals cases of the judgment below.

Each crime recognized by the lower judgment is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with each other, and thus, a single punishment shall be sentenced within the scope of the term of punishment for which concurrent crimes are aggravated by judgment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

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

B. The record reveals: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for a crime of fraud, etc. at the Daejeon District Court on February 20, 2014; and (b) on February 28, 2014, the said judgment became final and conclusive (hereinafter “previous 1”) and (c) on October 17, 2014 at the Daejeon District Court on February 28, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to one month of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime committed on or after February 28, 2014; and (d) on April 10, 2015, the said judgment became final and conclusive (hereinafter “second criminal conviction”). Accordingly, each of the instant crimes committed by the lower judgment, which were found guilty, may be recognized as being the fact that it was the crime committed before the first criminal conviction and the judgment became final and conclusive.

Therefore, since each of the instant crimes constitutes a case where a person could concurrently be sentenced to the previous crimes on February 28, 2014 among the first and second previous crimes, punishment should be determined by taking into account the equity in cases where a judgment is rendered simultaneously with the previous crimes on February 28, 2014 among the first and second previous crimes.

The judgment of the court below that applied Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act only in relation to the crime of the first criminal record has become unable to be maintained as it is.

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 about the sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed in entirety, and the following is again decided after pleading.

Criminal facts

The facts constituting the crime recognized by this court are.