A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

2. The judgment of the court below ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio determination, and each appeal was filed after the judgment of the court below was rendered separately, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings of each of the above appeal cases. Since each of the offenses of the court below is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment shall be sentenced in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, and in this respect, the judgment

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground that the above reasons for reversal of authority are the above, and it is again decided as follows.

[Discied Judgment] The criminal facts recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the entries of each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 360(1) of the relevant Act of the Criminal Act as to the crime (the embezzlement of stolen articles), Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 70(1)3 of the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act, Article 152 subparag. 1 and 43 of the Road Traffic Act, Article 148-2(2)2 and Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018)

1. Between the crimes of Articles 40 and 50 ( between the crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act by September 11, 2018 and the crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act by September 11, 2018: Punishment provided for a more severe violation of the Road Traffic Act) of the ordinary concurrent crimes;