Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the fact that the reason for return to the victim is clear as the stolen goods seized by the court below should be sentenced to return to the victim by the judgment (Article 33(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, one mountain bicycle (Evidence 1) seized by the investigative agency is apparent in the reason for return to the victim D as the stolen goods of this case. Thus, the court below erred by omitting it despite having to make a declaration of return to the victim by the judgment pursuant to Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. Although only the defendant appealed against the court below, the return was not only a type of punishment but also a disadvantage to the defendant. Thus, even if the court below makes a declaration in addition to the return of the victim, the sentence against the defendant does not change.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall not be maintained since it erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the return of the victim of seized articles.

3. If so, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows, without examining the grounds for appeal by the defendant, on the grounds of ex officio reversal.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by the court is the same as the corresponding column of the 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 Articles of the Act and the choice of punishment concerning the facts constituting the crime;