절도등
All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.
1. The sentence imposed by the original court on the summary of the grounds for appeal (one hundred months of imprisonment, two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.
2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the defendant, this Court tried by examining the appeal cases against the two original judgments by combining them, and each of the crimes in the decision of the original court are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and shall be sentenced to a single sentence pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the original judgment cannot be maintained any more.
3. The judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again ruled as follows after pleading.
Criminal facts
The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding columns of each judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, Article 329 (a) of the Criminal Act that prescribes the choice of punishment, Articles 231, 34 (1), and 31 (1) (a) of the Criminal Act, Articles 234, 231, 34 (1), and 31 (1) of the Criminal Act (a point of uttering of falsified investigative documents) of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (a point of fraud), the choice of imprisonment with prison labor
1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;
1. The reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent offenders committed each of the crimes in this case during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime, and the fact that the damage from each of the crimes in this case was not completely recovered is that the defendant was disadvantageous to the defendant.
However, the defendant is recognized to commit his crime, and the defendant is now able not to commit such a crime again while living together with an infant of one year of age who is still pregnant.
In addition to these circumstances, the defendant committed each of the crimes in this case.