The judgment below

Part 1-A, b, c. of the judgment, shall be reversed.

The crime of the first-A, b, and c. of the judgment of the defendant.

The lower court’s judgment on the scope of this Court’s trial is 1-C.

According to Article 32 (4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the applicant for compensation did not file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation order. Therefore, the rejection part of the application for compensation order became final and conclusive immediately.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below that rejected the application for compensation order by the applicant for compensation shall be excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. (Crime No. 1-A and B) The judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged solely on the ground that part of the goods seized in the Defendant’s residence was owned by the said victims, although the Defendant did not steals the victim D and the victim H as stated in this part of the facts charged, there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment of the lower court (Article 1-A, B, and Article 1-C, of the Decision) takes into account the following factors: (a) the sentence of the lower court (Article 1-2, 1-2, 2-2, 2-2, 2-3, 3-2, 3-2, 3-2, 3-2, 3-2, 3-2, 3-2, 4, 3-2,

Crimes and No. 2 Crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to eight months) are too unreasonable.

A prosecutor of the judgment ex officio (refer to Bill of Indictment) maintained the part on the larceny of December 15, 2014 among the facts charged in the instant case, and on February 25, 2017, the part on the larceny as the primary facts charged, and the name of the offense in the preliminary charge is “Embezzlement of possessory items”, and the applicable provision of the law is “Articles 360 and 40 of the Criminal Act”, “a judgment to be used again under the facts charged,” and applied for an amendment to a bill of indictment with the same contents as the recorded in the column of the criminal history among “a judgment to be used again” as stated in the facts charged. This part of the judgment was modified by the court to this effect.

In this sense, at the end of that year.