Imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes of Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the judgment of the defendant, and 14,00.

A. In the case of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (i.e., robbery) as stated in the judgment of the court below, only the victim E's household effects and saves are brought about contingently, and there is no fact that the victim E's homebs and saves are considered as body saves, and there is no fact that the victim's homeb

In the case of the crime 2 (Fraud) of the judgment below, the fact that he received money from the victim H, and the fact that he belongs to the age and name of the victim is recognized. However, since the victim H knowingly donated money to the defendant, it does not constitute the fraud by deceiving the victim.

B. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant had a weak mental disorder to discern things or make decisions.

C. The sentencing of the lower court (two years of imprisonment and fines of 14 million won, and six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes of 1,3,4,5,6, and7 in its original judgment) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, the prosecutor examined the following facts: “Around September 15, 2013, the Defendant was willing to steal money and valuables from “D” entertainment bars located in Asan-si C with female entertainment loans; at around 07:00 on the same day, at the victim’s room located in Asan-siF, the victim was able to take advantage of the gaps in which the victim was locked, and at the same time, at the victim’s room located in Asan-siF, 50,000,000,000,000,000 won, and 70,000,000,000 won, and 170,000,000,000 won, and 170,000,000,000,000,000 won, and 30,000,000,00,000 won.”

In this regard, the judgment of the court below is subject to the adjudication.