All parts of the judgment below, excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

(b) the defendant;

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the first instance judgment: the fine of KRW 3 million; the second instance judgment: the suspended sentence of KRW 6 months; the probation period of KRW 2 years) that the lower judgment pronounced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, this Court tried to examine each of the appeals cases against the defendant by combining the judgment below against the defendant. Each of the offenses of the judgment below against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be exempted from all of its reversal.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the remaining parts of the court below's decision excluding the rejection of the application for compensation order pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act are all reversed, and it is again decided as follows.

[Discied Judgment] Summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below.

(Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act). Application of law

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. The first instance court’s decision on the punishment of larceny, and the second instance’s decision on the punishment of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2 and 3, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Probation Criminal Act is that the crime of this case was committed repeatedly against many victims, and the crime is not good.

There is a history of punishment of the defendant 10 times (one punishment, three times a suspended execution, and seven times a fine) due to the same theft crime.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized his mistake and is in profoundly against himself.

Victim O, Q, C, and only those.