The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Seized evidence No. 1 shall be confiscated.

1. The sentence of the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. The fact that the defendant has a majority of the criminal records of the same kind, in particular, the crime of this case was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime and committed only one month after the execution of the sentence is completed, which constitutes a repeated crime, and that there is no changed circumstance after the judgment of the court below is an element of sentencing unfavorable to the defendant.

B. However, with respect to the instant crime, Article 5-4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Special Crimes Act”) and Articles 342 and 329 of the Criminal Act apply, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for one year and six months (Seoul Western District Court Decision 2012Da1426 Decided August 17, 2012), and thereafter, the Defendant was from March 23, 2014 to the same year.

5. up to three times, he/she was prosecuted for committing a larceny under the same Act for three years and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for three years after he/she was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the following crimes;

(Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2014Ra162 Decided June 27, 2014). On May 14, 2015, Article 5-4 (1) of the above Aggravated Punishment Act, which served as the basis for the defendant's punishment, on which Article 329 of the Criminal Act and the attempts thereof have been decided unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court. Article 5-4 (6) of the Aggravated Punishment Act is premised on the fact that the defendant again commits a crime under Article 5-4 (1) or (2) of the Aggravated Punishment Act within 3 years after the execution of the sentence was completed or exempted, and if the defendant was not punished under Article 5-4 (1) of the Aggravated Punishment Act, the defendant was not subject to aggravated punishment under Article 5-4 (6) of the Aggravated Punishment Act, the fact that the defendant recognized the defendant's criminal act, the victim does not want the defendant's criminal punishment, the fact that the crime in this case was attempted, and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is concurrent with sentencing.

In addition, the defendant is aged 80.