절도등
The judgment of the court below shall be reversed, respectively.
Each crime of the judgment of the court below in the first, second, and fourth judgment and the third judgment of the court below.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the first instance judgment: the fine of KRW 3 million; the second instance judgment; the imprisonment of KRW 1,50,000; the imprisonment of KRW 3 million; the imprisonment of KRW 3:2 months; and the imprisonment of KRW 4: the imprisonment of KRW 1) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment of the court below, ex officio, was completed with respect to each of the crimes committed by the defendant as stated in the judgment of the court below, and the defendant was sentenced to the above punishment, and each of the above appeals cases pending by the defendant after filing an appeal against each of the above judgments was decided to concurrently examine the above appeal cases. Each of the crimes (except the crimes of No. 3 in the judgment of the court below) committed against the defendant in the first to fourth to the judgment of the court below (except the crimes of No. 3 in the judgment of the court below) shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below against the defendant was no longer maintained.
In addition, the judgment of the court below of the second instance that sentenced one year to the defendant for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) on July 25, 2013 on the premise that the judgment of the court below was finalized on August 2, 2013, it recognized that each crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (Unlicensed Driving) and each crime of violation of the third judgment constitutes concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and determined a punishment by taking into account equity and equity in the case of concurrent judgment pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. However, as the application for recovery of the defendant's right to appeal against the second judgment was cited on October 14, 2013, the appellate court of the second judgment is continuing to be in the court of the first instance. Meanwhile, according to the records, the defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor on September 3, 2009, and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 14, 2009.