The part of the crime No. 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

A fine shall be imposed on the defendant 6,00.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal Nos. 1 and 2 of the decision of the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. According to evidence duly adopted and examined by the second instance court and the first instance court (the second instance court) of the omission in dealing with concurrent crimes, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspension of execution of four months from the Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch on April 19, 2011 to a non-prosecution of imprisonment on April 27, 2011, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on April 27, 2011. Since each of the crimes in the second instance judgment is in a concurrent crime under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the crime of false accusation for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, the punishment shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity and the case where a judgment is to be rendered at the same time pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Since the application of the second instance court’s statutes

B. Article 32(2) of the Criminal Act was omitted in the application of the aforementioned Act while recognizing a guilty guilty of aiding and abetting the Defendant, which is an indictment against the Defendant. The second judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

C. The consolidated trial defendant filed an appeal against the judgment below 1 and 2 and the court of the court of the first instance decided to jointly examine all the above appeal cases. Since the crime No. 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance and the crime No. 2 of the judgment of the court of second instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment shall be imposed within the scope of the punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, and in this regard, the part concerning the crime No. 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance in the judgment

3. Determination of the assertion of unfair sentencing (the part concerning the crime of 1, 2, 3, and 4-b of the judgment of the court of first instance) is that the defendant fully acknowledges the crime of this case, and the equity in the case of a judgment concurrently with the crime of which judgment becomes final and conclusive.