A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

2. In light of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of the same repeated crime and that the Defendant had been punished several times for the same kind of crime, the instant crime is subject to criticism.

However, in full view of all the sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, as it is too unreasonable, in view of the following: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime; (b) the Defendant did not focus on the damage caused by the instant crime; and (c) the victims do not want punishment any longer by mutual agreement with the victims at the time of the trial; and (d) the victims want to

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit.

[Judgment of the court below No. 3, 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act clearly states that "investigation report (criminal investigation of destruction and damage)" is a clerical error in investigation report (criminal investigation of destruction and damage). Thus, it shall be corrected ex officio pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the facts constituting a crime and the summary of evidence recognized by the court, and the summary of evidence are the same as that of each corresponding column of the court below. Thus, it shall be quoted as it is in accordance with

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, and Article 366 of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the sentencing conditions set forth in the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (up to the amount of concurrent crimes which are set forth in the largest fraud), prior to the reason for sentencing, shall be comprehensively taken into account and determined as ordered by the text.