특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The punishment of the accused shall be four years of imprisonment.
2.2.2m in length, 30cm in length.
1. According to the progress records of the case, the following facts are recognized:
A. In the case of Gwangju High Court Decision 2014No377 Decided December 11, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a five-year sentence of imprisonment pursuant to Article 5-4(6) and (1) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Amended by Act No. 10210, Mar. 31, 2010; Act No. 13717, Jan. 6, 2016; hereinafter the same), and Articles 329 and 342 of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as “the judgment subject to a retrial”), and thereafter, the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive in the final appeal.
B. On September 22, 2017, upon the Defendant’s request for a retrial, this Court rendered a decision to commence a retrial on September 22, 2017, and such decision became final and conclusive as is.
2. The gist of the grounds for appeal asserts that the punishment of the court below is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the sentence of the court below is too unfilled and unfair.
3. We examine ex officio determination.
In this court, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes to “Habitual Larceny” among the names of the crimes against the Defendant, and applied law to “Article 5-4(6) and (1) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Articles 329 and 342 of the Criminal Act,” which read “Articles 332, 329, and 342 of the Criminal Act,” and permitted this Court.
As the subject of the instant judgment was changed accordingly, the lower judgment became unable to be maintained as it is.
4. The judgment of the court below is reversed without examining the two parties' unfair grounds for reversal of authority. It is so decided as follows.
【Grounds for another judgment】 The facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts constituting the offense and summary of evidence, and thus, the gist of evidence is identical to the relevant column of the judgment below. Thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 369
Application of Statutes
1. Article 332 of the Criminal Act of this Act concerning criminal facts.