The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

The seized evidence subparagraph 1 shall be returned to the victim.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor prior to the judgment.

Seized stolen property, the reasons for return to the victim of which are apparent, shall be sentenced to return to the victim by judgment (Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act), and unless return to the victim is made, seizure of the seized property shall be deemed to have been rescinded (Article 332 of the Criminal Procedure Act), and the investigative agency shall return it to the victim of seizure.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, since evidence No. 1 which was seized by the investigative agency from the defendant was stolen by the defendant and the reason for return to the victim is clear, and there was no evidence to deem that the above seized article was temporarily returned on the record, the court below erred by omitting the sentence on return to the victim regarding No. 1 of the evidence confiscated by judgment pursuant to Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

B. An applicant for compensation as to an application for compensation by an applicant for compensation filed in a trial to seek payment of KRW 26,511,200 and delay damages therefrom, but it is not reasonable to issue an order for compensation in criminal proceedings, on the grounds that the amount of the above application for compensation exceeds the amount of damage indicated in this part of the facts charged, and the scope of the Defendant’s liability for compensation is unclear.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for ex officio reversal, and it is again decided as follows. The application for compensation by the applicant for compensation is based on Articles 32(1)3 and 32(2) and 25(3) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.