The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

gallon jus flus smartphone (C).

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the original court’s imprisonment (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The ex officio determination prosecutor changed the name of the defendant from "Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" to "Habitual larceny", and applied for changes to "Articles 5-4(6) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" and "Articles 32, 329, and 35 of the Criminal Act", and the court granted permission.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below against the defendant became unable to be maintained as it is due to changes in the subject.

3. If so, without examining the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, the lower judgment is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, and the following is again decided after pleading

Criminal facts

The summary of the evidence and the facts charged against the defendant recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense (or, collectively, the choice of imprisonment);

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 333(1) of the Return Criminal Procedure Act is against the Defendant’s recognition of the instant crime, the fact that the Defendant appears to have committed each of the instant crimes contingently, the fact that the victim’s damage was not significant, and the Defendant’s growth in an influence environment, which led to the current situation, are conditions for sentencing favorable to the Defendant. On the other hand, even though the Defendant had been sentenced six times to larceny or imprisonment with prison labor, he again committed the crime in a way similar to the previous crime for four times within the repeated crime period, and the Defendant adapt to society from theO, etc.