All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor of one year and six months and a fine of two million won.

The defendant above.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding (as to the judgment of the court below No. 2), the defendant 1 merely saw the defendant's door, which was left under the squad in a situation where there is no room around the scene as stated in the facts charged in the second instance judgment, and the defendant took possession of the defendant's door. Thus, the crime of embezzlement is not established even if the defendant's act can be established (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant's assertion"). The defendant's door contains only female clothes and cosmetics, and the victim's door contains only 4.4 million won in cash as stated in the facts charged in the second instance judgment, 13.1 million won in his own check, and 2.3 million won in the market price, and 1.1 million won in gold 2.1 million won in the market price, and 100 million won in the market price, and 1.3 billion won in the market price, and there is no error in the judgment of the court below finding the defendant guilty that the defendant's act constituted a crime of larceny (hereinafter referred to as "the market price of this case, etc.).

B. The punishment sentenced by the first instance court (2 million won in penalty) and the second instance court (2 years in imprisonment) are too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the judgment of the court below on the grounds of appeal by the defendant.

The judgment of the court below against the defendant was rendered, and the defendant filed an appeal against all of the judgment below, and this court decided to consolidate the two appeals cases.

Since each of the judgment below's offenses is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act, the judgment below cannot be maintained in its entirety.

However, the grounds for appeal against the defendant's mistake of facts against the judgment of the second instance are still subject to the judgment of the court, and this is examined.

3.No. 2.