Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

A. On the judgment of the court of first instance, the sentence of the court of first instance (one year of imprisonment) against the judgment of the court of first instance is too unreasonable.

B. On the second instance judgment, the Defendant did not steals KRW 350,000 in cash owned by the victim. 2) The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) under Article 2 of the unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Examining ex officio prior to the determination of the Defendant’s assertion of ex officio, each of the lower judgment can no longer be maintained in the following respect:

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court even though there is such ground for ex officio reversal.

A. Each original court rendered a judgment of imprisonment with prison labor as above after completing a separate hearing against the Defendant.

The defendant filed an appeal against the above two judgment of the court below, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing of the two cases appealed.

However, each of the crimes in the judgment of the court below against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

B. The second court established the crime of forging private documents and the crime of forging private signature on the premise that the defendant's act of preparing a written statement and a written confirmation of investigation process is a separate document, and that the above two crimes are in the relation of substantive concurrent crimes.

However, Article 244-4(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides, “The prosecutor or senior judicial police officer shall record the time when the suspect arrives at the place of investigation, the time when the investigation commences and completes, and other matters necessary to confirm the progress of the investigation process in the suspect examination protocol, or record it in a separate document and bind it in the investigation record.” The prosecutor’s direction of investigation as to the judicial police officer according to delegation of Article 196(3