The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The three-month imprisonment sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. According to the Defendant’s oral statement before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant, the Defendant was sentenced to three months of imprisonment for special larceny, etc. on November 10, 2016 at the Daegu District Court and its Daegu District Court and its branch, and the fact that the above judgment became final and conclusive on March 2, 2017 is recognized. The above crime and each of the crimes of this case, for which judgment became final and conclusive, are in a concurrent relationship after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a punishment is determined at the same time after considering the case and equity and considering the mitigation or exemption of punishment in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the lower judgment is no longer maintained.

3. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the error of sentencing by the defendant and the prosecutor, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of facts and evidence admitted by this court is as follows: the criminal facts of the lower judgment and the summary of the evidence are as follows: “The Defendant was sentenced to three months of imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny, etc. on November 10, 2016 and the said judgment became final and conclusive on March 2, 2017 in the column of each of the criminal records of the 2016 senior group 4393 and 201 senior group 4958.

The phrase “a defendant’s oral statement” is added as evidence of the previous conviction in the column of evidence and, except for the addition of “the defendant’s oral statement at the trial” as evidence of the previous conviction in the column of evidence, as stated in each corresponding column of the lower judgment. As such, it is cited by Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 360 (1) of the Criminal Act (the embezzlement of deserted articles in possession, the selection of imprisonment), Article 331 (2) and Article 331 (1) of the Criminal Act (the occupation of special larceny) of the option of criminal facts;

1. The Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes;