The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental written opinions not timely filed) are examined.

In light of the language, legislative intent, etc. of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, where a crime for which judgment has not yet become final and conclusive cannot be judged concurrently with the crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, it is reasonable to interpret that the sentence cannot be imposed, or the sentence may not be mitigated or exempted, taking into account equity and equity in cases where a judgment is rendered at the same time pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do948, Oct. 27, 2011). Where several crimes for which one judgment has not yet been rendered are not yet rendered before and after the final and conclusive judgment are final and conclusive, the crime committed before and after the final and conclusive judgment cannot be judged concurrently with the crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive. As such, Article 38 of the Criminal Act cannot be deemed to have been established between several crimes and Article 37(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1601, Apr. 14, 201).

Each crime of fraud against which the court below sentenced a five-month punishment (hereinafter referred to as "crimes in Section 2") is to be committed by the defendant from around February 16, 2016 at the Busan District Court.

7. Prior to the final and conclusive judgment of two years of probation (hereinafter “final and conclusive judgment”) rendered on February 15, 2017 for each of the three months of criminal fraud committed by the end of October, 201.