The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) The Defendant paid KRW 30 million to the victim and transferred the transport right that was acquired from M to the victim as indicated in the lower judgment.

The Defendant acquired the above transportation right before the victim.

L also did not speak to the effect that it can be transported immediately, and the victim did not make such a statement, and the victim knew that the actual transport commencement will take considerable time.

2) The victim, regardless of the Defendant’s explanation, anticipated that the above transportation right will benefit by his own judgment and acquired it from the Defendant, is not recognized as a relation between the Defendant’s deception and the victim’s mistake or dispositive act.

3) As the Defendant paid the price in trust of M and received the above transportation right from M, there was no intention of deception or deception.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

According to the records of this case and the facts in this court, ① the Defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Jung-gu District Court on April 10, 2015 (the Jung-gu District Court Decision 2014No2334), which became final and conclusive on July 23, 2015, and ② the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor at the Incheon District Court on December 22, 2017 for a crime of fraud on December 22, 2017, in addition to imprisonment with prison labor for ten months at the Incheon District Court on December 22, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a separate crime of fraud, etc., and was sentenced to two years and six months of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of fraud, which was committed after July 23, 2015, which became final and conclusive, and thus does not constitute concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act at the same time, and thus, does not constitute concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

It may be recognized that the above judgment was final and conclusive on March 6, 2018 after having been sentenced to B (Seoul District Court 2017No. 2502).

The above facts of recognition.