General Provisions
Where a judgment finds a person guilty of one of several specified offences, but it's unclear which, the offender is punished for whichever of those offences carries the lowest punishment (if they're not all the same).
This resolves a specific evidentiary problem: if a court is certain the person committed SOME offence from a set of possibilities but can't determine exactly which one, fairness requires giving the benefit of the doubt by imposing the lightest applicable punishment among the possibilities.
If evidence proves someone committed either a lesser or a more serious fraud offence but it's genuinely unclear which, this rule requires sentencing them for the lesser offence, resolving the uncertainty in the accused's favour.