All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (No. 1 and No. 2 of the judgment of the court below: Imprisonment with prison labor for each of 8 months) declared by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. On the basis of ex officio determination, the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below, and the court decided to hold the above appeal jointly with all of the above appeal cases. Each crime of the first and second judgment of the court below against the defendant is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one punishment should be imposed within the scope of the term of punishment increased by concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below against the defendant was no longer maintained.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in entirety without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and it is so decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, the summary of the evidence is cited.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, Article 360(1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment (the embezzlement of deserted articles in possession), Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 347-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 70(1)3 of the Act on Specialized Financial Business for Credit (the use of stolen or lost credit card), Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, and each choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act that aggravated concurrent crimes has been punished several times prior to the instant case. However, in light of the fact that the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes under the same and the same Acts without being aware of during the period of repeated crimes, it seems that the risk of recidivism is very high, and thus, the Defendant is disadvantageous to the Defendant.