The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court's punishment (two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

A crime for which judgment of imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment has become final and conclusive and a crime committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive falls under concurrent crimes prescribed in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, punishment shall be imposed in consideration of equity in cases where a crime among concurrent crimes under Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act is adjudicated concurrently with a crime for which judgment has not become final and conclusive.

Meanwhile, in light of the language, legislative intent, 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 Decision 2012Do9295, Sept. 27, 2012). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant was sentenced to one year for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court on May 15, 2014, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 29, 2015, and the final and conclusive judgment on February 13, 2015, which became final and conclusive on May 20, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2017Du1781, supra.

Nevertheless, the lower court committed the crime of final judgment No. 2 with respect to each of the crimes of this case committed after the date of final judgment No. 1 and the Criminal Act.