All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

No. 1 to 7, 9.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The prosecutor (an unreasonable sentencing on the first and second original judgment) declared by the lower court against the Defendant (the first and second original judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 2 years: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months) is too unjustifiable and unfair.

B. (1) The Defendant did not participate in the crime of fraud by using the computer, etc. of this case, by deceiving the victim N to transfer money to E and O.

(2) Of the crime of fraud using the computer, etc. in this case, the part that received KRW 6,100,000 from the new bank account under E (F) around May 12, 2015 among the crime of fraud using the computer, etc. in this case is in violation of the principle of prohibition of double punishment, since the Defendant was prosecuted and tried again even after having been punished by the first judgment of the lower court.

(3) The above sentence imposed on the defendant by the second instance of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal of ex officio judgment, the first and second judgments were rendered to the defendant, and the prosecutor filed an appeal against them, and the defendant also filed an appeal against the second judgment, and the court decided to concurrently deliberate on the above two appeals cases. The first and second judgment with respect to the defendant is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the first and second judgment cannot be maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

B. The Defendant alleged that there was no participation in the crime of fraud by the use of the computer, etc. of this case in the second instance, and the lower court against this assertion, under the title “determination of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion” among the grounds for the judgment, not less than two persons.