The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and eight months.

The costs of lawsuit by the court below shall be borne by the defendant.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (two years of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Reviewing the reasoning of the Defendant’s appeal ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the summary information of the case, and the text of the judgment (Tgu District Court 2015 Inventory 31 of the Inventory), the Defendant, who was sentenced to two years by habitual larceny, etc. at the Daegu District Court on July 9, 2015, can be recognized as having been sentenced to two years by imprisonment on January 25, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 25, 2016. As such, the instant crime with habitual larceny, etc., for which the judgment became final and conclusive, is in a concurrent relationship with the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment by taking into account equity and equity, the lower judgment cannot be maintained.

3. Therefore, 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 the judgment below is reversed, and the following is again decided after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court are as follows. The defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for habitual larceny at the Daegu District Court on November 21, 2013 and completed the execution of the sentence at the Daegu Detention House on September 2, 2015.

“The Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for habitual larceny, etc. at the Daegu District Court on July 9, 2015, and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 25, 2016.

“In addition, the summary of the evidence is as indicated in each corresponding column of the lower judgment, except that the phrase “a criminal investigation report (in addition to the information on confinement),” “a criminal investigation report (a criminal suspect A’s written judgment, summary order attached),” and “a summary information inquiry, judgment (Seoul District Court 2015 Inventory 31 of the Inventory 2015),” respectively, is the same as indicated in the relevant column of the lower judgment. As such, the summary of the evidence is cited pursuant to Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Criminal facts;