상습절도등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
Nos. 7 to 10 per annum of the total list of seized articles.
1. In light of the purport of the grounds for appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel (unfair sentencing) that the defendant recognized the error of sentencing, actively cooperated in the investigation, and committed each of the crimes of this case for livelihood after his/her independence while living in the nursing center, etc., the sentence of the court below that sentenced two years to imprisonment is too unreasonable.
2. We examine ex officio prior to judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.
A prosecutor shall submit the facts charged [2016 high order 48] from among the facts charged for the trial
1. The last two parallels of habitual night larcenys: “The portion of [Attachment Table 1], “The total sum of approximately KRW 5,255,000 was stolen on 12 occasions, as shown in [Attachment Table 1],” which read as follows: “The total sum of KRW 7,85,000 was stolen on 13 occasions in total, as shown in Annex 1 list of crimes;” “The portion of [Attachment Table 1] was changed to “Attachment Table 1” attached to the judgment of the court; and this Court permitted this portion, thereby changing to “the number of crimes 1” attached to the judgment of the court; thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.
3. The judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.
Criminal facts
The summary of the defendant's facts constituting the crime and the gist of evidence are the facts constituting the crime of the judgment below.
1. The part of the last two parallels of habitual night larcenys, which read, “a total of approximately KRW 5,255,00,000 in total, as shown in Appendix 1 List 1, was stolen,” which read, “a total of approximately KRW 7,85,000 in total over 13 times as shown in Appendix 1, such as in Appendix 1, was stolen,” and read, “Attachment 1” attached to the judgment of the first instance court, and evidence was changed to, “Attachment 1” attached to Table 1.