The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

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

2. According to the records of ex officio determination, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for habitual larceny at the Incheon District Court on July 14, 2016, which was after the sentence of the lower judgment, and on July 22, 2016, the judgment became final and conclusive on July 22, 2016 (the Incheon District Court 2016 Inventory 2016 Inventory 24). As such, the above habitual larceny and the above habitual larceny for which the judgment became final and conclusive are concurrent crimes by a group after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the sentence should be determined by taking into account equity with the case where the judgment is rendered simultaneously pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below is no longer able to maintain.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for appeal by the defendant, on the grounds that the above reasons for appeal are reversed ex officio, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

The summary of the facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the summary of the facts constituting an offense and evidence is subject to the judgment of the court below. The part of the "criminal records" in the part of the "criminal records" in the "criminal records" of the judgment of the court below, which was sentenced to one year and six months by imprisonment with labor for a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, at the Incheon District Court on March 26, 2009, was deleted. The defendant was sentenced to one year and four months by imprisonment with labor for habitual larceny at the Incheon District Court on July 14, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 22, 2016.

In addition to adding "," it is the same as the entry in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, provided, however, that prior to the instant crime, the Defendant larcenys against those who had been temporarily set away in subway trains even prior to the instant crime.