The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. According to the records of this case’s judgment ex officio, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a period of eight months in imprisonment with prison labor for fraud in the Gwangju District Court Branch Branch on December 22, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 18, 2017. As such, the crime of the lower judgment against the Defendant and the crime of fraud, which became final and conclusive in the judgment of the lower court, are in the relation of concurrent crimes in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and are determined by taking account of equity with the case where the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously in accordance with the main sentence of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus,

3. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant and the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting a crime recognized by this court and the summary of the evidence thereof are the facts constituting a crime of the original judgment [criminal records] The part of the original judgment stating that “The Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of eight months in imprisonment for fraud at the Gwangju District Court Branch Branch Branch on December 22, 2016,” stating that “The Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years in imprisonment for eight months in the form of fraud at the Gwangju District Court Branch Branch Branch on December 22, 2016, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years in the form of fraud, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on August 18, 2017,” as stated in each corresponding column of the original judgment, and thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code to deal with concurrent crimes, but the reason for sentencing in the first sentence of Article 39(1) recognizes all of the crimes in this case, and the judgment above becomes final and conclusive.