The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

Seized evidence 1 through 3, 5 through 8, 10 through 10.

1. The sentencing of the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The crime of this case is a systematic and planned crime to purchase a lost or stolen smartphone and remove the lost or stolen smartphone overseas to divide profits. The smartphone purchased in this case is a large amount of money. Due to such crime, social harm such as stimulating or promoting the criminal intent of the theft or possession of smartphones, etc. In light of the fact that the defendant was sentenced to a fine three times for the same crime, and again commits the same crime within a short time, the defendant should be able to strictly prevent the defendant from doing so.

However, in light of the motive and background of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, the Defendant committed the instant crime under the initiative of X and Y, and X’s punishment became final and conclusive (Seoul Southern District Court 2013No729) by committing the instant stolen property acquisition (including the acquisition of the instant stolen property), and other circumstances, which are the conditions of sentencing as shown in the instant records and pleadings, such as the motive and circumstance of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, the lower court’s sentencing is somewhat unreasonable.

B. Additional ex officio, Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act provides that an article that does not belong to a person other than an offender or can be confiscated by a person other than an offender with the knowledge of the fact after the crime, which can be confiscated as an article that can be confiscated under subparagraph 1, and Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that an article that has been provided or intended to be provided for an act of crime shall be returned to the victim by a judgment if the reason for return to the victim is apparent.

However, according to the records, each of the sub-phones or pre-phones of Nos. 11 to 18, 21 to 25, seized evidence is the defendant.