The judgment below

The part, excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant's ex officio, the act of receiving the same kind of money in itself, which is prohibited under Article 3 of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission, does not include deception, and the crime of violating the above Act and the crime of fraud vary in the form of and legal interest in each other as separate crimes different from the elements thereof. Therefore, it is reasonable to view both crimes as a substantive concurrent relationship, not a commercial concurrent relationship.

(2) In light of the legal principles as to the number of crimes, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the number of crimes, and thus making it impossible to exempt the reversal of the judgment below. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the number of crimes, and thereby making it impossible to exempt the reversal of the judgment below.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed, without examining the defendant's ex officio reversal of unfair sentencing, and the remaining parts of the court below's decision pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, excluding the rejection of the application for compensation order, are reversed (the judgment of the court below which rendered a single punishment by treating each of the reversed and each of the crime of violation of the Act on the Regulation of fund-raising, and the remaining crimes as concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act shall be reversed

However, the applicable column of the judgment below

1. Article 23(3)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings is clear that “Article 25(3)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings” of the dismissal of an application for compensation is an error under Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, and such dismissal ex officio is corrected.

(C) [C].]