The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence against the accused shall be determined by one year and six months of imprisonment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (two years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Before the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by authority, the prosecutor changed the name of the crime against the defendant from "Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny)" to "Habitual larceny", and the applicable provisions of law to "Articles 5-4(1) and 329, 330, and 35 of the Criminal Act" were amended to "Articles 332, 329, and 35 of the Criminal Act", and the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as the case was changed to the subject of the judgment by permitting it.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows through pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by the court is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 332 of the Criminal Act and Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. The reason for sentencing Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crime is that the Defendant had the record of being punished twice for the same kind of crime, in particular, even though the period of repeated crime due to the same crime was in existence, one week has not elapsed since the release from the prison in the South South South South Korea, and in addition, the crime of this case was repeated under the same several laws as the previous crime, the total amount of damage from the crime of this case reaches 7,690,300 won, and the victims have not been recovered until now.

However, the defendant's mistake is divided and reflected, and he does not commit a second offense.