beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
The District Prosecutors' Office of the Government of Council Nos. 2 and 3 seized evidence.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant had a mental and physical disorder at the time of committing the instant crime due to depression, etc.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.
2. Ex officio determination
A. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant, the judgment of the court below is ex officio and there is a ground for ex officio reversal as follows.
1) In the trial of the court, the prosecutor has applied for changes in the name of the crime to "Habitual thief" in "Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes", "Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 5-4 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and Article 329 of the Criminal Act", "Article 332 and Article 329 of the Criminal Act", and since this court permitted it and changed the subject of the judgment, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained. (2) Article 48 (1) of the Criminal Act provides that "goods which do not belong to a person other than the criminal or have been acquired with knowledge of the fact that a person other than the criminal was provided or attempted to be provided for the criminal act, goods which were produced or acquired due to the criminal act" shall be confiscated. Article 333 (1) and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "The reason why the victim is returned to the victim shall be returned to the victim by judgment."
In light of the records, ① Electric wires (No. 1, 2014. Pressure No. 792) that the court below sentenced the forfeiture from the Defendant are the objects of restoration to the victim merely because “the reason for return to the victim is clear with respect to the stolen property seized, but it is not necessary to make a separate sentence because it has already been temporarily returned to the victim.”