The judgment below

The remainder, excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be sentenced to one year of imprisonment.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (a maximum of three years of imprisonment, a short of two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the data submitted in the instant trial proceedings for ex officio determination, the Defendant was a “juvenile” under Article 2 of the Juvenile Act at the time of the pronouncement of the lower judgment, but the Defendant was adult at the time of the pronouncement of this judgment. As such, the lower judgment that sentenced the Defendant’s non-guilty sentence on the ground that he was a juvenile under the Juvenile Act was no longer maintained

3. As such, the remaining part of the judgment of the court below excluding the rejection of the application for compensation order excluding the above part of the decision of the court below excluding the rejection of the application for compensation order , without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, it is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2)

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding columns of the 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 provisions of the Criminal Act, Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 231 and 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234, 231, and 230 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234, 231, and 30 of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for each crime;

1. Of concurrent offenders, the sentencing guidelines do not apply to the Defendant’s reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, as the Defendant was a juvenile under the Juvenile Act at the time of the instant indictment.

In light of the fact that the Defendant recognized his mistake, the Defendant appears to have not been able to gain profits from the instant crime, and at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was a minor, and there are some circumstances to consider the circumstances under which the Defendant was involved in the instant crime, and the Defendant had no record of criminal punishment, the instant crime, such as the instant case, constitutes a social harm.