All the convictions of the first and second original judgments shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two years and two months.

1. Scope of the judgment of this court;

A. On October 19, 2019, the second instance court rendered a judgment of innocence as to the larceny of the Defendant among the facts charged against the Defendant, and rendered a judgment of conviction as to the remainder of the facts charged. Only the Defendant appealed as follows.

Therefore, since the non-guilty portion of the second judgment which the prosecutor did not appeal is separated and confirmed as it is due to the lapse of the appeal period, it shall be excluded from the scope of the judgment.

B. The second instance rejected an application for compensation by AL, which is an application for compensation, and the applicant for compensation is not able to file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation order pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and its judgment becomes final and conclusive immediately. Therefore, the part rejecting the application for compensation order is excluded

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each crime in the judgment of the second instance, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability.

B. Each judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and the second instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for two years) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination ex officio by this court decided to consolidate each appeal case of the judgment below against the defendant. Each of the first and second types of offenses in the first and second parts of the judgment of conviction is in concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence should be sentenced within the scope of the term of punishment limited to concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the conviction part of the first and second parts of the judgment of conviction cannot be maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's argument about the second judgment of the court is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

4. The records of this case, such as the motive and background leading up to each crime in the judgment of the second instance, the result of the crime, the defendant's behavior before and after the crime, etc.