The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

One Cheongju District Prosecutors' Office, which has been seized.

1. On August 7, 2014, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of habitual special larceny against Victim C on August 7, 2014 and habitual larceny against Victim E and D among the facts charged in the instant case, and sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months. On July 8, 2014 and each of the larcenys on July 19, 201, in relation to each of the above crimes, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the grounds of the charge.

On this basis, only the Defendant appealed on the conviction of the lower judgment on the ground of unreasonable sentencing.

The judgment below

The acquittal part of the reasons was transferred to the trial together with the conviction part which is related to the crime of universality.

However, among the judgment of the court below, the part not only did the prosecutor appeal but also did not dispute it, and the above part is not subject to the examination and judgment of this court by deviating from the object of attack and defense between the parties.

Therefore, this Court decides that the judgment of the court below is not guilty and that the judgment of the court below is only based on the conviction.

2. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s imprisonment (one year and six months of imprisonment, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

3. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio, the prosecutor examined the case in question, and the prosecutor applied for permission to change the indictment by changing the name of the crime [2014 high-ranking 337] and [2014 high-ranking 377] from the Act on Habitual Larceny to the Act on Special Habitual Larceny. The court granted permission.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is, since the subject of adjudication was changed in the trial.

The judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the allegation of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal, and the following judgment is rendered as follows.

[Discied Judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court and summary of evidence are the facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence.