All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the punishment of one year and six months sentenced by the first instance court and the imprisonment of six months sentenced by the second instance court is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the instant case No. 2014No3245 of this Court, which is the appellate case against the judgment of the court of first instance, and the instant case No. 2015No107 of this Court, which is the appellate case against the judgment of the court of second instance, was consolidated in the oral proceedings of the oral proceedings. Each of the offenses committed by the judgment of the court below, is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and should be sentenced to a single sentence within the extent that aggravating concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for appeal by the defendant, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding column of each judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 3 of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc., Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 330 of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 347 of the Criminal Act, Article 347-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 347-2 of each Criminal Act, and Article 347-2 of each Criminal Act concerning fraud by using computers, etc.

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reasoning for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that each of the crimes in the judgment of the court of first instance on the ground that the victim F reported the defendant as the defendant as larceny, the hotel account account for the above victim’s working at night.