The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The seized 14cc. 14cc. d. d. d. d. d. 5).

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

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

In the first instance trial, a prosecutor shall read the name of the crime related to the facts charged in the instant case as “Habitual Larceny” in the “Habitual Larceny.” As such, the pertinent provision of the Act was amended by “Article 332, 331(1), 329, 342, 35, 37, 38, and 48(1) of the Criminal Act” in “Article 332, 330, 329, 342, 35, and 48(1) of the Criminal Act to no longer than 10 days, among the facts charged in the instant case, to the effect that the court below’s amendment of the indictment was made to the “disorder of Amendment to the Bill of Amendment” in the “No more than 332, 330, 342, 35, and 48(1) of the Criminal Act to the “No more than 10th day after 2015.”

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting an offense and the summary of the evidence acknowledged by this court is as follows. The Criminal Procedure Act applies to the following changes: (a) the phrase “ around August 28, 2015, 01:00” in the second sentence of the lower judgment as “ around August 28, 2015, 03:10”; and (b) the phrase “law” in the attached Table No. 7 column as “after the locking of the lock-out system after the locking of the lock-out system,” except for those changes into “after the lock-out system was destroyed by Raber,” respectively, as stated in the corresponding column of the lower judgment.