All appeals by the defendant against the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2 are dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the summary of the grounds for appeal (Article 1 (1) and 2 (3) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records as to ex officio destruction following a consolidated hearing, the defendant may be found to have been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of fraud on April 26, 2019 at the Seo-gu District Court Branch Branch Branch of the Daegu District Court, which became final and conclusive on May 22, 2019. The above crime and fraud for which the judgment of the court below became final and conclusive on May 22, 2019 are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, taking into account equity in cases where a judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and the crime of the second instance judgment and the crime of the first instance judgment committed after such judgment became final and conclusive cannot be concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do2351, Jun. 10, 201). Therefore, each offense in the holding of the first and second instances does not constitute a case where one sentence is to be rendered pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the grounds for reversal ex officio are nonexistent even though the appellate case against the lower judgment was combined in the trial.

3. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court of the applicable legal doctrine, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). B.

The defendant has the same criminal record of fraud, which depends on several times on the argument of unfair sentencing on the judgment of the court of first instance.

The Defendant committed each of the instant crimes within the same repeated crime of fraud, and the criminal records and the criminal records of fraud, which are similar to each of the instant crimes, are all the crimes.

The records and arguments of this case, such as the age, occupation, family relationship, health status (finite, etc.) of the defendant, and the details of the crime, have not been prepared by the victims.