Of the judgment of the court below, the part concerning the crime of fraud against Defendant B of the first instance judgment is excluded.

1. The first instance court, with respect to Defendant B, exempted Defendant B from punishment for fraud of using a computer which is in the relationship of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and sentenced Defendant B to imprisonment with prison labor for the remaining special larceny and each crime of fraud.

Defendant

B made it clear that only special larceny for which one year of imprisonment was imposed among the judgment of the court of first instance and fraud are appealed, and since the prosecutor did not appeal separately, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance on the computer use for which punishment is exempted was separated from that of fraud.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding Defendant B’s fraud is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.

2. The summary of the reasoning of the appeal (No. 1: imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant A; imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny; imprisonment with prison labor for each offense; imprisonment with prison labor for one year; imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant A; imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months; and imprisonment with labor for Defendant B four months) is excessively unreasonable.

3. The judgment of the court below against the Defendants ex officio determination was rendered separately, and the Defendants filed an appeal against them, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing of each appeal case. Each of the offenses against the Defendants (excluding the part concerning the fraud of Defendant B’s computer use among the judgment of the court of first instance excluded from the scope of inquiry) committed by the court below against the Defendants (excluding the part concerning fraud of Defendant B’s computer use among the judgment of the court of first instance) under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is a concurrent offense under Article 38(

4. The judgment of the court of first instance, excluding the part relating to the crime of fraud of Defendant B’s computer use, which is the subject of the judgment of the court of this case, is reversed, and the judgment below is reversed under Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without further proceeding to decide on the Defendants’ unfair assertion of sentencing, and it is again decided as follows.