The judgment below

The remainder of the compensation order, excluding the compensation order, shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. In the trial of the court of the ex officio judgment, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes to change the term “violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes” among the names of the crimes against the defendant as “Habitual larceny”, and Article 5-4(5) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and Article 329 of the Criminal Act, “Articles 32 and 329 of the Criminal Act” in the corresponding part of the applicable provisions

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows, without a need to decide on the argument of unfair sentencing by the defendant and prosecutor.

Criminal facts

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

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 332 of the Criminal Act, Articles 32 and 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor, respectively;

1. Among concurrent crimes, the reason for sentencing of Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (Aggravation of concurrent crimes stipulated in No. 2, No. 3, Table 2, Table 3, of Crimes in the Judgment of the court below with the largest punishment) of the Criminal Act among concurrent crimes has been repeated several times during a short period of time, the defendant committed larceny and fraud, and the damage from the crime is considerable. Nevertheless, the defendant was unable to recover the damage completely, and there is no change of circumstances after the judgment of the court below. In particular, the defendant's habitual larceny crime of this case is first committed.