The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In the judgment of ex officio fraud, where the money is acquired through deception several times against the same victim, the crime is single and the method of the crime is the same, only a single crime shall be established. However, if the identity and continuity of the crime are not recognized or the method of the crime is not the same, each crime shall be deemed to constitute substantive concurrent crimes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 89Do1309, Nov. 28, 1989; 97Do508, Jun. 27, 1997). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, each fraud described in the attached list of crimes in the judgment is deemed to infringe the same legal interest of the victim as a single and continuous criminal, considering the same victim's time difference, etc., and it is reasonable to deem that the crime of fraud is a single and the same legal interest of the victim as a single criminal.

Nevertheless, since the court below recognized each of the crimes listed in the annexed list of crimes as substantive concurrent crimes, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the number of crimes, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

【Inasmuch as the original judgment is identical to the facts constituting a crime and the summary of evidence recognized by the court, the summary of the facts constituting a crime and the summary of evidence is identical to the entries in each corresponding column of the original judgment, it shall be quoted as it is in accordance with Article 369 of

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act and Article 347 of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the following sentencing) provides for suspension of execution.