The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Nos. 1 and 2 of seized evidence to the victim J.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months) of the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

(a) As the stolens omitted from “victims’ return”, where the reason for return to the victim is apparent, a sentence of return to the victim shall be sentenced by judgment (Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act); where the victim fails to return them, seizure of the seized articles shall be deemed cancelled (Article 332 of the Criminal Procedure Act); and the investigative agency shall return them to the person subject to seizure.

However, according to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, Articles 1 and 2 of the evidence seized by the defendant in the case No. 2019Da3909 was stolen by the defendant, and the reason for returning the above seized article to the victim J is apparent, and there is no evidence to deem that the above seized article was temporarily returned on the record, and the court below should issue a ruling of return to the victim JJ as to the above seized evidence No. 1 and 2 by judgment pursuant to Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, the court below erred by omitting this.

B. In addition, according to the records, it is reasonable to view that the relation of the number of crimes among the crimes as stated in the judgment of the court below is a substantive concurrent crime relationship. However, the court below committed an unlawful act omitting the application of the provision of concurrent crimes in its reasoning, which led to the failure of the judgment of the court below to maintain any more in this respect.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

[Grounds for the judgment of multiple times] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court are all relevant columns of the judgment below.