All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable as each of the original judgments is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, this Court decided to concurrently examine the appeal cases against the lower judgment. Each of the lower judgment against the Defendant is in a concurrent crime relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence should be imposed within the term of punishment, which increased concurrent crimes in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the lower judgment cannot be maintained.

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

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud), Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 260 of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for the crime;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes began from the day following the completion of detention in a workhouse for 10 days after the execution of punishment due to the same larceny.

The defendant has been sentenced to fines several times due to the same crime of larceny and several times due to the same theft crimes.

However, if the defendant acknowledges all of the crimes of this case, and excludes the cellular phone returned to the victim, the damage amount of theft and fraud is not more than 263,00 won in total.