The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not have any factual background at each of the instant sites.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is unreasonable.

2. According to the records of ex officio determination, the Defendant was sentenced to one year to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) in the Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch on November 12, 2019, and such judgment became final and conclusive on April 14, 2020.

Thus, since the crime of the judgment below and the above crime against the defendant for which the judgment of the court below became final and conclusive are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the equality in the case of concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act shall be considered and the sentence shall be determined after examining whether mitigation of punishment is exempted. The judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is, since the sentence was determined without

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is subject to the judgment of this court, so this will be examined below.

3. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined in the lower court’s determination of the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the increase between the offender and the Defendant’s appearance on CCTV taken place at each scene of the instant crime is consistent, and it can be recognized that the DNA of the offender discovered in the presence of the scene and the Defendant’s DNA coincide with each other. Thus, the fact that the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes, such as the facts stated in the lower judgment

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is not accepted.

4. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without omitting the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground of the above reasons for reversal of authority.

[Discied Reasons for the judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court are criminal facts of the judgment below.