All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

The judgment of the court below of first instance is that of the first and third crimes and that of the second and second judgment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (crimes Nos. 1 and 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance: Imprisonment with prison labor for April, suspension of execution for two years, and crimes No. 2 and 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and one year for two years: Imprisonment with prison labor for eight months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment of ex officio (the part of the judgment of the court of first instance in the judgment of the court of first instance) on the grounds for appeal, the defendant filed an appeal against the first and second judgment by ex officio prior to the judgment of the court of second instance, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings of the above two cases of appeal. The first and third crimes in the judgment of the court of first instance in the judgment of the court of first instance are concurrent crimes between special larceny and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. At the same time, each of the crimes in the judgment of the court of second instance in the judgment of the court of second instance in the judgment of the court of first instance in the concurrent crimes of Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act shall be sentenced to one punishment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, since the crimes in

B. Determination on the assertion on unfair sentencing (Article 2 and 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance) (the part on the crime of this part) requires strict punishment for the defendant, considering that the defendant committed the crime of this part on three occasions together with AD and committed a theft of KRW 5.90,00 won, entering a convenience store, and 2.70,000 won, respectively, and the nature of the crime was bad, the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of suspended execution due to a special larceny, and still has not been recovered from damage.

However, there are extenuating circumstances that consider the Defendant favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant led to the confession of this part of the crime, the Defendant committed the instant crime in a state of mental disorder due to intellectual disorder, and the fact that the amount of damage is a relatively small amount. Such circumstances and other various kinds of sentencing shown in the argument of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, and family environment.