The judgment of the first instance is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and for one year, respectively.

1. The sentencing of each of the first instance courts (the sentencing of Defendant A: the imprisonment of 8 months and Defendant B: the imprisonment of 1 year) against the Defendants in the summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable.

2. Review of the reasoning for appeal ex officio and the record reveals that the first instance court did not attempt to contact with the Defendants with other mobile phone numbers (Defendant A: T, Defendant B: U) recorded in the trial record, and that on October 22, 2013, Defendant A made a decision by public notice against Defendant B on September 24, 2013, and on September 24, 2013.

Therefore, the above decision of service by public notice is illegal because it does not meet the requirements, and the judgment of the court of first instance is in violation of the law and affected the judgment.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is reversed ex officio without examining the Defendants’ assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment of the first instance court is reversed ex officio under Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court are as shown in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

A. Defendant A: Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act; the choice of imprisonment

B. Defendant B: Articles 347(1) and 30 (the fraud in the first instance judgment) of the Criminal Act; Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the fraud in the second instance judgment); Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the second instance judgment in the first instance judgment); the choice of imprisonment

1. Handling concurrent crimes (Defendant A) (latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act are against the Defendants. Defendant A is in the relation of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the judgment that became final and conclusive, and it is more favorable to consider the equity between the case and the case where the judgment is rendered at the same time.

(b).