The judgment of the first instance is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The sentencing of the first instance court (six months of imprisonment) is too large, thus unfair; and

2. Special larceny in the judgment of the court of first instance as to ex officio determination is a crime falling under Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, and the statutory penalty is from 1 to 10 years. Thus, in order to sentence the Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor for less than one year, a discretionary mitigation should have been made in accordance with Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act.

However, while sentencing six months to the defendant, the court of first instance erred by omitting discretionary mitigation in the application of statutes, thereby violating the minimum statutory penalty.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment of the court of first instance is reversed, and the following is again decided after oral argument.

Criminal facts

The summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence recognized by the court shall be as stated in the corresponding columns of the judgment of the court of first instance.

Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act cites it as it is.

[However, since it is obvious that the crime of attempted special robbery is a clerical error in the crime of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective weapon, etc.), the ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure] before and after the facts constituting the crime of the first instance judgment are confirmed.

1. Article 331 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 (C) of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation include: (a) the Defendant’s misunderstanding of and reflects his fault in depth; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime; (c) the Defendant was guilty of larceny; (d) the Defendant was guilty of larceny; (c) the degree of injury; and (d) the degree of injury; and (e) all the other factors of sentencing, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, circumstances leading to the instant crime; and (e)