The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) that the court below rendered on the defendant is too unreasonable as the sentence (2 million won penalty) imposed on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records of ex officio judgment, the defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Cheongju District Court on February 10, 2017, and on February 28, 2017, it can be known that the above judgment became final and conclusive. Since each of the above crimes and the crime of this case, which became final and conclusive, are concurrent crimes with the crime of this case after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, are in a relationship with a group of concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, the court below determined a punishment for the crime of this case by taking into account the case at the same time and equity pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the following is again decided after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting a crime and the evidence admitted by this court is as follows: “The Defendant was sentenced to three months of imprisonment for a crime committed in the Daejeon District Court on August 10, 2016 and the judgment above was finalized on December 30, 2016; on February 10, 2017, he/she was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment for a crime committed in the form of fraud, etc. at the Chungcheong District Court on February 28, 2017; and the above judgment became final and conclusive on February 28, 2017.” The summary of the facts constituting a crime and the evidence added “1. Cheongju District Court Decision 2015 High Court Decision 1644 delivered on February 16, 201” to the column of the evidence in which the evidence is used. The same is as stated in each corresponding column of

In accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act, they are quoted as it is.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting a crime and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. The first sentence of Article 37 of the Criminal Act to treat concurrent crimes: Provided, That the first sentence of Article 39 (1) shall be applicable;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2)1 of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse.