특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. (1) Defendant (1) was guilty of a misunderstanding of facts or a misunderstanding of legal principles that the lower court found guilty among the facts charged in this case. ② Even if the Defendant had one U.S.B camera at the scam room in the judgment of the lower court with respect to the crime under paragraph (1) of this case, this should not be constituted for larceny, regardless of the establishment of the crime of embezzlement of stolen possession, the lower court convicted each of the above facts. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending of facts or misapprehending of legal principles in the guilty part of the lower judgment.
(2) The lower court’s sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. (1) In the instant facts charged, the prosecutor (1) found the Defendant not guilty of the thief crime against the victim’s property among the facts charged in the instant case, but sufficiently recognized the facts of the thief crime based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor. Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts in the
(2) The lower court’s sentencing is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. (1) Before determining ex officio on the grounds for ex officio reversal of the grounds for appeal due to changes in the indictment, the Prosecutor applied for changes in the scope of adjudication by applying for changes in the date, time, place, method of crime, and damaged items of the facts charged in this case concerning larceny of the victim's property owned by the victim'sO among the facts charged in this case, and permitting its members to do so. In addition, the crime of the changed part of the indictment shall be sentenced to one punishment in relation to the crime of the remaining crimes in the judgment of the court below against the defendant, since the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.
(2) Judgment on the Defendant’s argument regarding amendments to indictment (A) is made before the amendment to indictment is made.