The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

A victim of seized evidence No. 2.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and two months of imprisonment) shall be excessively unreasonable.

2. The fact that the Defendant again committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that he/she had been punished for the same kind of crime over several times, repeated crimes within the short period of 12 times, and the fact that the majority of the victims and the victims did not agree with five of the victims even though they did not have a significant amount of damage, and that there was no measure to recover the damage, are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, if we consider all of the sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime in this case and the circumstances after the crime, the punishment sentenced by the court below is somewhat unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is with merit, and it is again decided as follows.

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

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of imprisonment

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 333(1) of the Return Criminal Procedure Act shall be determined as per Disposition in consideration of all the sentencing conditions under Article 333(2) above.