All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although at the time of committing the crime of misunderstanding of facts in the judgment of the court below, the defendant did not enter the skin management room with the criminal intent of larceny, the judgment of the court below of second instance recognized the liability for the crime of attempted larceny of night buildings, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding of facts.

B. At the time of committing each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder, mental disorder, or mental disorder.

C. Each sentence sentenced by the lower court (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for August, the second instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for June, and the third instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for six months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, each of the appeals cases was deliberated concurrently in the trial by the defendant, as he filed each appeal against the judgment below. As long as each of the criminal facts stated by the judgment of the court below is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, it shall be decided at the same time and sentenced to a single punishment. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

However, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts and the argument of mental or physical disorder are still subject to the judgment of this court despite the above reasons for reversal of official authority.

B. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below of the second instance on the assertion of mistake of facts are: (i) the Defendant stated that, in the process of the interrogation of the prosecution on January 9, 2014, the Defendant divided the right to use a successful bid once free to the surrounding persons, and on the premise that he was posted on the table; (ii) the Defendant stated in the above statement that, in the process of the interrogation of the prosecution, the Defendant followed a book tag and a book tag at the time of the crime, and posted the documents, etc. on the table; and (iii) immediately after the arrest of the Defendant in the above statement, the Defendant stated that he was posted on the table.