Each part of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning each of the crimes listed in subparagraphs 1 and 2 of the judgment and the second judgment shall be reversed respectively.

Defendant .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing each crime in the judgment of the first instance court (as to each crime in the judgment of the first instance), the Defendant was in a state of mental disability due to shock by depression.

B. The respective types of punishment (each of the crimes listed in the judgment of the first instance court: Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and 3 and 4 of the judgment of the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months and 4 months: imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months and 4 months) of the judgment of the court of the first instance are excessively unreasonable.

2. In full view of the evidence and the result of the examination duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding each part of the crimes in the judgment of the first instance court, the circumstance that the defendant was suffering from depression at the time of committing each crime in the judgment of the first instance court does not seem to have reached a weak state of ability to discern things or make decisions. Thus, the defendant's assertion of mental or physical disability is not accepted.

3. Although the defendant's judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing on each part of the crimes of Articles 3 and 4 in the judgment of the first instance court is contrary to the judgment of the court of first instance, and it is necessary to consider equity in the case where the defendant was tried at the same time before the confirmation of the first head of the judgment. However, considering the fact that the defendant had a large number of criminal records of the same kind and each of the crimes of this part is the crime committed during the period of the same repeated crime, the amount of damage is not small, the defendant did not receive the statements from the victims, and the defendant was locked in the process of the judgment of the first instance court, the

4. Prior to the judgment of the court of first instance on the part concerning each of the crimes listed in Articles 1 and 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance and on the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing on each of the crimes listed in the judgment of the court of second instance, the above crimes are concurrent crimes listed in the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and as long as this court concurrently examines these crimes, the defendant shall be sentenced to one punishment on each of the above crimes under Article 38 of the Criminal Act.