The judgment below

Part of the judgment 1 and 2 of the crime shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes of 1 and 2.

1. Each sentence of the lower court (for crimes No. 1 and No. 2 in its holding: Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, and crimes No. 3 in its holding: Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months) is too unreasonable.

2. As to the grounds for appeal of the first and second crimes as to the judgment of the court below, the defendant has a record of criminal punishment on several occasions, including a sentence of punishment for the same kind of crime.

Nevertheless, since the defendant has committed the crime of this case repeatedly, it is inevitable to impose a sentence on the defendant.

On the other hand, however, the defendant recognized his mistake and reflected his mistake.

The amount of damage to the instant crime is not so significant as to be KRW 3.74,00 (Embezzlement) and KRW 2.5 million (Fraud), and the Defendant agreed in the lower judgment with the victim E of the embezzlement crime.

In addition, the instant crime is a concurrent crime established on November 20, 2015 with a judgment rendered on November 20, 2015, and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and it is necessary to determine punishment in consideration of equity in cases where a judgment is rendered at the same time under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act

Considering these circumstances favorable to the defendant, taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant, and taking into account various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments, such as the age, character and conduct environment of the defendant and the circumstances before and after the crime, the sentence imposed by the court below is somewhat inappropriate.

3. As to the grounds for appeal of the third crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, the fact that the defendant recognized his fault and reflected his fault is favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is not likely to be committed by cutting out pine trees to a third party on the ground that the defendant received a request from the injured party for the purchase of pine trees from the third party.

Even if the value of stolen pine trees exceeds KRW 16 million, damage has not been compensated.

B. Although the Defendant had been subject to criminal punishment several times due to the crime of fraud, embezzlement, etc., the Defendant again committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution, and thus, the Defendant will be subject to more preference.