All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for two years and imprisonment with prison labor for one year) of the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below against the defendant for ex officio determination was rendered, and the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below, and the court decided to hold concurrent hearings. Since each crime of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and a single sentence should be sentenced in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below cannot

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows after hearing.

[Discied Judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 5-4 (5) 1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 5-4 (5) 1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Articles 342 and 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act, Article 70 (1) 3 of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act (the use of stolen credit cards, comprehensive punishment), Articles 70 (1) 3 of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act

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

1. Of the concurrent crimes, the facts that the Defendant, as the reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, Article 50, and the proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act, led to the confession of the crimes in this case, is favorable.

On the other hand, the defendant has been subject to criminal punishment on several occasions for larceny crimes.