The judgment below

The remainder, excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In the trial of the court of the ex officio judgment, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes to change the name of the defendant to "Habitual Larceny" and "Article 5-4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" and "Articles 330, 331(1), and 342 of the Criminal Act" to "Articles 332, 330, 331(1), and 342 of the Criminal Act" and the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any further because the court permitted the amendment.

3. Accordingly, 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 assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground of the above ex officio reversal, and the judgment below is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are as stated in the corresponding column of the original judgment, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 332, 330, 331 (1), and 342 of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of criminal facts (or, collectively, choice of imprisonment);

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 48(1) of the Confiscation Criminal Act is that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflected, and the court below agreed with some victims in the judgment of the court below, and the additional four victims agreed in the appellate court, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, however, the defendant has continued to commit larceny for a long time, and thus, the nature of the crime is not weak, is highly likely to be criticized, and the damage has not been agreed with many victims until now, and the damage has not been recovered is disadvantageous to the defendant.

(b) other.