All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal is unfair because it is too unreasonable that each sentence (the decision of the court of first instance: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years, and imprisonment for 6 months) pronounced against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the judgment of the court below was rendered ex officio, and the defendant filed an appeal against each of the above two appeals cases, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings. Since each of the offenses against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below should be sentenced to one punishment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, and in this respect, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and it is again decided as follows.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of criminal facts and evidence against the defendant recognized by the court is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment (elective of imprisonment);

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act for concurrent crimes are as follows: (a) the Defendant was released from parole without being sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime; and (b) the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes again from four days after the parole; and (c) in light of the progress of such crimes, there is a high possibility of criticism against the Defendant.

In addition, it is not certain from many victims who have contacted the report by inserting an Internet bulletin that the defendant sells heavy goods.