All of the judgment of the court below except for a compensation order shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

(b).

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (the first instance court: 2 years of imprisonment and the second instance court: 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable; and

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the appeal case against the judgment below was consolidated by examining ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal for ex officio judgment. Each of the offenses in the judgment below is a concurrent offense relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment shall be imposed with a single sentence within the scope of punishment aggravated for concurrent offenses pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Therefore, all of the judgment below shall

3. 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, and the following is again decided through oral argument.

[Discied Judgment] The criminal facts recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the corresponding columns of each judgment of the court below, and thus, they are cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347 (1) (Fraud) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on probation and community service order lies in seven victims of this case, and the total amount of damage reaches about 500 million won, and there is no previous conviction for the defendant to be punished heavier than a fine, and all of the victims except for the victim R agreed with the victim (the victim M agreed with the defendant, but the victim's intention was withdrawn again at the trial but the defendant's wife was withdrawn again at the trial). The victim's wife deposited KRW 5 million at the trial in order to recover damage from the victim's R, the defendant's wife needs to assist the defendant by chronic renal, and other crimes of this case.