The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Seized Masan (Evidence No. 2) and stock farms (Evidence. 2).

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (a year, June and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio, the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one and half years of imprisonment for special larceny at the Seoul Northern District Court on June 16, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive around that time. Each special larceny as stated in the judgment of the court below against the defendant is in the concurrent relationship between special larceny for which the judgment became final and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the latter part of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act is in a concurrent relationship with the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

3. According to the conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for appeal by the defendant, and the following is again decided after pleading.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of criminal facts and evidence admitted by this court is the first head of the lower judgment’s criminal facts. “The Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and six months for special larceny at the Seoul Northern District Court (Seoul Northern District Court on June 16, 2016) and the judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

“A previous conviction in the judgment of Seoul Northern District Court 2016 order 1526)” is added to “a prior conviction in the judgment of Seoul Northern District Court 2016 order 1526)” in the space of evidence in which the evidence is required, and this is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Articles 331 (1) and 330 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 37 of the Criminal Act for the treatment of concurrent crimes: Provided, That Article 39 (1) shall apply;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant has a number of larcenys including eight times a sentence.