The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

1. The punishment sentenced by each judgment of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (Article 1: 8 months of imprisonment, and imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year and six months) is too unreasonable.

2. The Court rendered ex officio reversals and examines each appeal case against the lower judgment.

Each crime in the holding of the court below is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a sentence shall be imposed in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

The judgment of the court below has reasons for ex officio destruction.

The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without proceeding to decide on the grounds for appeal by the defendant, and the judgment is again ruled as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by the court are the same as the entries in each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, all of the judgment below are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Acts and Subordinate Statutes

1. Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, Article 5-4 (5) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of a limited term punishment for the crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes;

1. The proviso to Article 35 and the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and the proviso of Article 50 and Article 42 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is to recognize each of the instant crimes and reflect in depth the Defendant’s depth.

The amount of damage caused by the theft crime of this case is relatively minor, and the defendant agreed with the victims, and the vehicles are integrated insurance.