A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Seized evidence 1, 2, and 5 shall be confiscated.

2. In full view of the arguments in this case and the reasons for sentencing indicated in the record, such as the defendant's age, career relationship, etc., the court below's punishment seems to be unfair and unfair, since the defendant was committed in the first instance court, ① the confession of the crime in this case and reflects against the defendant, ② there is no criminal punishment for the same kind of crime, the frequency of the crime is one time, the amount of damage is six million won, and the defendant's age, career, family relation, etc.

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is decided after pleading.

[Grounds for a new judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence admitted by the court is modified as “ August 23, 2017,” under Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act, on the 1st page of the judgment below, and the summary of the evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below, except for adding “1.1 Defendant’s trial testimony” to “the Defendant’s trial testimony” in the summary column of the evidence. Thus, it is acceptable as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 347 (1) of the Selection of Punishment;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act to be confiscated;