The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. With respect to the fraud on June 21, 2006, which was determined by the court below to be acquitted, this part of the facts charged is compared with other facts which are the subsequent crimes, and the victim has lent money to the effect that the defendant "if he lends money, he would make an investment in real estate and pay interest as well as the principal," and the victim has not paid money in a lump sum, regardless of whether he has received monthly payment or at once, has lent money to the defendant's false statement of "the method of making a payment in one year more disadvantageous to the victim" which may be relatively unfavorable to the victim after reference to the monthly payment method of the defendant, and thus, the method of deception is identical. Thus, other facts charged as the facts charged as to which the acquittal was recognized is identical, notwithstanding the fact that the criminal intent is a single and the method of comprehensive crime is identical, the judgment of the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles and misapprehension of legal principles due to the expiration of the statute of limitations period due to substantive concurrent crimes on June 21, 2006.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (four months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 ex officio: “A crime for which a judgment to face with imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment has become final and the crime committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive” falls under concurrent crimes prescribed in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, a punishment shall be imposed on the said crime in consideration of equity in cases where a crime for which judgment has not been rendered among concurrent crimes and a crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act is concurrently adjudicated under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act.