All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (with respect to all of the original judgment)

A. At the time when the Defendant committed the instant crime, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and had weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. In light of the fact that the defendant is against unreasonable sentencing, the circumstance and degree of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months and 2 months: imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months) is too unreasonable.

2. As the defendant filed an appeal against all the judgment of the court below, each appeal case was consolidated and tried in the court. Since each criminal facts of the judgment of the court below are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, it should be ruled at the same time and sentenced to a single punishment.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

Despite these reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's claim of mental disability is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

3. First of all, we examine the defendant's claim of mental retardation, as to the larceny in the first judgment and the crime of larceny in night in the second judgment, and the defendant's claim of mental retardation.

In light of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the method and content of the instant crime, and the Defendant’s behavior and attitude before and after the commission of the crime, it is difficult to view that the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the commission of the crime.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

Then, this paper examines the defendant's claim of mental disability concerning the damage of property and the criminal facts of residential intrusion in the first judgment.

According to the statement at the police station of the victim H, the defendant was on July 27, 2014 and on his house stairs around 20:30.