All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

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

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (Article 1: 1 year of imprisonment, and 2: 10 months of imprisonment) declared by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below, and the arguments were combined in the trial. Each of the crimes that the judgment of the court below rendered are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and should be sentenced to a single punishment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below that sentenced a separate punishment for each of the above crimes cannot be maintained in this respect.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the sentencing of the defendant on the grounds of ex officio reversal, and the judgment below is reversed in entirety, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.

[Discied Judgment] The criminal facts recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the entries of each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

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

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

1. Among concurrent offenders, the reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act do not know even though they had the record of being punished for the same kind of crime, and the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of the same repeated crime, and the responsibility for such crimes is not easy.

However, the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake in depth.

The amount of damage caused by each crime of the judgment of the court of first instance is not significant, and some of the damaged goods were returned to victims, and the damage was partly recovered.

The age, character and conduct of the defendant in these circumstances.