The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the court below is too unreasonable as the punishment (1.5 million won in penalty) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

According to the records, on May 2, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and eight months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Seoul Eastern District Court on September 11, 2018 and the above judgment became final and conclusive on September 11, 2018 (Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2017 order 1575, Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2018No635, and Supreme Court Decision 2018Do12410). The Defendant’s crime of this case is in the concurrent relationship between the above judgment and the above concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act and the latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and the Defendant shall be sentenced to punishment in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment becomes final and conclusive at the same time, and the lower court, without considering this, was unable to maintain any further.

3. The court below's decision is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

[Grounds for a new judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court, and summary of evidence related thereto, the judgment of the court below was rendered on May 2, 2018 and the judgment of the court below became final and conclusive on September 11, 2018, when the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor of one year and eight months in Seoul Eastern District Court for fraud, etc.

The summary of evidence is changed to “1. Before the ruling: Along with the addition of the case search by the Supreme Court (Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2017 Madan1575) and the investigation report (the attachment report to a criminal suspect) to “the previous conviction in the ruling,” and “a summary of evidence” to the end, it is identical to the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. As such, it is cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Application of Statutes

1. Article 347 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, provided that Article 39(1)1.