The prosecutor's appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance and the defendant's appeal against the judgment of second instance are all dismissed.

The sentence (five million won in penalty) imposed on the defendant by the first instance court (as to the judgment of the court of first instance) of the summary of the grounds for appeal (as to the judgment of the court of first instance) is too unfluent and unfair.

Defendant (Defendant 2) (Defendant misunderstanding the lower court’s judgment) entered a newspaper distribution station to commit fraud and brought about a closed newspaper with intent to pay expenses after the seller was absent, but did not intrude into a newspaper distribution station with intent to steal the newspaper from the beginning, or did not cut 80 copies of the newspaper.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

The punishment sentenced to the defendant (three months of imprisonment) by the second second instance of the punishment is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor (as to the judgment of the court below of first instance), the crime of this case was committed by the defendant against the victim who is a female, and the nature of the crime was heavy, the defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of the fact that the above victim's pet dog was stolen, infringed upon his residence, and was sentenced to the suspended execution due to the crime of damaging property, and the defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of the fact that he was sentenced to the suspended execution even though he was sentenced to the suspended execution due to the crime of causing bodily injury, etc.

However, considering the fact that the Defendant is led to the instant crime, the fact that the Defendant does not want the punishment of the Defendant any longer by mutual consent with the victim at an investigative agency, and other various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unfeasible and unreasonable.

The prosecutor's argument is with merit.