The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and four months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, a special larceny is committed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding (not guilty in the judgment of the court below) is sufficiently recognized in full view of the following: (a) the victim stated that the thief was 4 million won since the first police report; (b) the victim stated that the thief was 4 million won; and (c) the Defendant stated the face at the time of the thief crime; and (d) the Defendant was faced with the Defendant’s hand in the process of the thief; and (b) there is a possibility that the 4 million won was stolen and the thief was not taken on CCTV images, as described in this part of the facts charged.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (a two years and four months of imprisonment, exemption from punishment, and forfeiture) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the ex officio decision-making prosecutor.

According to the records of this case, the Defendant was sentenced to three months by imprisonment with prison labor for the purpose of larceny at night at the Daejeon District Court on September 29, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 7, 2016. As such, the crime for which judgment became final and conclusive and the special larceny crime of this case constitute concurrent crimes by the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment is determined in consideration of equity and the case where judgment is to be rendered simultaneously pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and thus, the lower judgment is no longer maintained.

However, there are such reasons for ex officio reversal.

Even if the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding the facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, we will examine the following matters.

B. The judgment of the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts (the part of the judgment of the court below’s acquittal) 1) The summary of this part of the facts charged is cashed from the Kitter’s credit cooperative in which the Defendant destroyed and intrudes the back through a steel mon, dr, etc., which was operated by the victim V located in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City BI on September 30, 2017.