The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Seized evidence No. 1 shall be confiscated.

evidence of seizure.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the original court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio judgment.

Seized stolen property, the reasons for return to the victim of which are apparent, shall be sentenced to return to the victim by judgment (Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act), and unless return to the victim is made, seizure of the seized property shall be deemed to have been rescinded (Article 332 of the Criminal Procedure Act), and the investigative agency shall return it to the victim of seizure.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, subparagraphs 2 through 6 of the evidence that was confiscated by the defendant by the investigative agency is the money that the defendant stolen, but since the money that the defendant stolen is mixed with the money that the defendant stolen, it cannot be classified by the victim, it shall be ordered to return the money to the victim who was not the victim

Since the reason for return to the victim is clear, and there are no materials to deem that the above seized articles were provisionally returned on the record, the lower court erred by omitting such materials in making a declaration in regard to subparagraphs 2 through 6 of Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act by judgment in accordance with Article 333(1).

(1) The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and there is no damage to the defendant due to the victim's return. Thus, in the case of appeal filed only by the defendant, the victim's return omitted from the judgment of the court below shall not be deemed to violate the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous change under Article 368 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

[Judgment] Summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence.]