The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 80,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant introduced the victim’s joint Defendant B (hereinafter “B”) with the first instance trial, and the victim did not participate in the conclusion of a lease agreement with the content of leasing his/her house to B.

There is no fact that the Defendant would pay a security deposit or a rent under the above lease agreement.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant before determining ex officio.

The crimes for which judgment to face with imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment has become final and the crimes committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive are concurrent crimes provided for in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, a punishment shall be imposed in consideration of the equality between the crimes which have not been adjudicated among concurrent crimes and the crimes for which judgment has become final and conclusive under Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act

The lower court, on June 30, 2017, sentenced the Defendant to a suspended sentence of two years in October due to fraud, etc. at the Seoul Western District Court, which became final and conclusive on July 8, 2017, by having been sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years.

In addition, since the crime of this case committed before the judgment becomes final and conclusive and the crime of this case committed before the judgment becomes final and conclusive are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, in determining the punishment for the defendant, the punishment of this case and the crime of this case, which became final and conclusive, were sentenced in consideration of equity with the

According to the records, the court below did not have any evidence about the contents and results of the judgment, such as the judgment of fraud, the date of confirmation, etc. of the judgment of the court below, and there is no evidence to find out all the psychological traces through the judgment of the court below as to what the specific contents of the previous conviction, such as fraud, etc. in the above judgment

Therefore, the court below takes into account equity with the case of concurrent judgment of fraud, etc. which has become final and conclusive under Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act.