The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of one year and six months, a short of one year and a fine.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the crime of special larceny by the defendant, theft crime, and violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes committed by the defendant was related to all inclusive crimes due to the realization of the defendant's theft habits, the court below recognized the above crimes as separate crimes and sentenced them to concurrent crimes. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (long-term one year and six months, short-term one year and fine three hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio judgment.

A. As the stolen goods omitted from the declaration of return to the victim, the reason for return to the victim is clear shall be sentenced by judgment (Article 33(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, among the seized goods of this case, the evidence No. 8 of this case is the stolen goods due to the crime No. 10 in the crime table No. 10 in the crime table attached to the court below, and the reason for return to AL is apparent, and the evidence No. 9 of the court below is the stolen goods due to the crime No. 1 in the crime table No. 1 in the crime list attached to the court below, and the reason for return to AL is apparent. Thus, the court below erred by holding that the above seized goods should be returned to the victim's name unclaimed, and the court below did not declare the above confiscated goods to AL. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending this,

B. In the trial of the party, the prosecutor changed the indictment to the existing facts in the indictment, which was habitually in collaboration with AL, was in front of the Daegu Dong-gu BK apartment at around 15:00 on April 26, 2012, and the AL was reported to the network, and the defendant gets in front of the Daegu Dong-gu BK apartment at around 15:00, and the defendant gets in front of the victim BL, 101 and 213, the house of the victim BL, and thereafter, the AL was also in the same way.