All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The sentence of the original judgment (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months) is too unreasonable.

The court of the court of the ex officio judgment decided to consolidate each appeal case of the first and second court's judgment against the defendant.

The judgment of the court below in the first and second instances is one of the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence shall be sentenced within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes by judgment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

In this respect, the judgment of the first and second court cannot be maintained as it is.

In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of the above ex officio reversal, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the evidence and facts constituting each offense against the defendant recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are as stated in the corresponding columns of the judgment below.

Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act is quoted as it is.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 323 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 323 of the Criminal Act, Articles 355 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 231 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for each of the following reasons:

1. Of concurrent offenders, the fact that the reason for sentencing Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act has a record of being punished for the same kind of crime, and that there is no agreement with the victim C is unfavorable.

However, the defendant led to the confession of all of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake in depth, and the victim was not punished against the defendant under a mutual consent between the victim Aju Capital Co., Ltd. and the defendant, and the degree of his participation in the embezzlement of the victim C seems to be relatively minor.