A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

The victims of seized evidence 1 to 4.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio judgment.

Seized stolen property, the reasons for return to the victim of which are apparent, shall be sentenced to return to the victim by judgment (Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act), and unless return to the victim is made, seizure of the seized property shall be deemed to have been rescinded (Article 332 of the Criminal Procedure Act), and the investigative agency shall return it to the victim of seizure.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the evidence Nos. 1 through 4, which was confiscated by the defendant by the investigative agency, is the money that the defendant stolen, but the money that the defendant stolen is mixed with the money that the defendant stolen and thus it cannot be classified by victim. Thus, the court below ordered the return of the victim's name

The lower court erred by omitting the submission of the evidence No. 1 through 4, which was seized by judgment pursuant to Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, inasmuch as the reason for return to the victim is apparent (see, e.g., No. 16 of the evidence list), and there is no evidence to deem that the above seized articles were temporarily returned on the records.

(1) The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and there is no damage to the defendant due to the victim's return. Thus, in the case of appeal filed only by the defendant, the victim's return omitted from the judgment of the court below shall not be deemed to violate the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous change under Article 368 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Re-use.