The part concerning Defendant A and B in the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant

A and B, respectively.

[Judgment on the Reasons for Appeal] The sentencing of the court below (the sentencing of defendant A: 1 year of imprisonment of the court below, 2 months of imprisonment of the court below, 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment of the court below, 2 months of imprisonment of the court below, 1 year and 2 months of the court below, 1 year and 1 year of short-term 8 months of imprisonment of the court below) is too unreasonable.

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

Defendant

A and B filed each appeal against the judgment of the court below, and this court decided to hold concurrent trials with each of the above appeals cases. Since each of the above offenses against the above Defendants is concurrent offenses under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, it is necessary to impose a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment or amount increased by concurrent offenses in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, and therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below against the above Defendants in this regard cannot be exempted from all reversal.

In addition, according to the records, it is recognized that Defendant C was sentenced on November 26, 2014 to imprisonment for a short term of one month and two months for fraud at the court below on November 26, 2014, and that the judgment became final and conclusive on December 4 of the same year

Since each of the crimes against the above defendants is in the relation of fraud for which judgment has become final and conclusive and concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, punishment shall be determined in consideration of equity with the concurrent judgment pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance that did not take such measures against the above defendant cannot be reversed.

As such, since the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance on the part concerning Defendant A and B are grounds for reversal of the above authority, without examining the Defendants’ assertion of unfair sentencing, the part concerning Defendant A and B among the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance under Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act are all reversed, and they are again decided as follows

Of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance, Defendant A and B.