All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (in light of the overall circumstances of this case), the punishment (in the first instance court: 10 months of imprisonment and the second instance court: 2 months of imprisonment) imposed on the Defendant is excessively unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. First of all, the appeal case of the first and second judgment against the defendant was combined with the appeal case of the first and second judgment. Each of the offenses of the first and second judgment is a concurrent offense relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and should be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment increased by concurrent crimes in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

B. Next, according to the records, the defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Daegu District Court on February 14, 2013, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on June 24, 2013. As such, the judgment of the court below in the second instance is erroneous in omitting aggravation of aggravation of repeated offense for each of the crimes of this case committed within three years from the completion of the enforcement as above, and thus, the judgment of the court below in this regard no longer maintained.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows after oral argument.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by this court is as follows: “The defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Daegu District Court on February 14, 2013 and completed the execution of the sentence on June 24, 2013” in the first head of the facts charged in the judgment of the court of second instance; and except for the addition of “the inquiry report including criminal records, etc., and the investigation report (the status of personal identification)” to the second column after the second column of the evidence, it is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment of the court of second instance, and thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.