All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

1. The decision of the court below (the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and the second instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the Defendant’s unfair argument of sentencing.

The defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below, and the court decided to consolidate each appeal case with each other.

However, the facts of the crime that the first instance court found guilty and the second instance court found guilty are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code, and thus, one punishment should be sentenced.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in its entirety pursuant to Articles 364(2) and 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the following is again decided after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by the court are the same as the corresponding columns of the judgment below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles 347(1) and 231 (the occupation of fraud), 234, and 231 (the occupation of the private document) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment for each of them;

1. In the case of fraud against the victim C with reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes, a return of KRW 10 million out of the amount obtained by deceit is made, each of the crimes of this case is against each of the crimes of this case, and there is no criminal record of the same kind, and there is no criminal record exceeding the fine.

However, the fact that the total amount of fraud exceeds 100 million won, and that the victim R andO was not completely recovered even after the lapse of a long time from the date of the crime, and that the efforts for recovery of damage is also neglected.