The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The decision of the court below (2,00,000 won) on the summary of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the term “a crime for which judgment to face imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment has become final and a crime committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive” constitutes concurrent crimes provided for in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, a crime for which judgment has not been rendered among concurrent crimes and a crime for which judgment has not been made final and conclusive under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act shall be sentenced in consideration of equity in cases where a judgment

Meanwhile, in light of the language, legislative purport, etc. of the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, if a crime for which judgment has not yet become final and conclusive could not be judged concurrently with the crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, it is reasonable to interpret that the sentence may not be imposed, or the sentence may not be mitigated or exempted, taking into consideration equity and equity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2013Do1203, May 16, 2014; 2012Do9295, Sept. 27, 2012). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant entered the period of suspension of execution in October 15, 2015 with imprisonment with labor for a violation of business affairs at Jeju District Court Decision 200Da1679, Oct. 23, 201; 2000Da1528, May 15, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “the final judgment”).

The date and time of criminal facts recognized in that judgment is recognized as of January 16, 2015, respectively, prior to the date of final and conclusive judgment No. 1. 2.