All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable that the punishment of the first instance judgment (one year of imprisonment), the punishment of the second instance judgment (eight months of imprisonment) and the punishment of the third instance judgment (ten months of imprisonment) are too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio, the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below Nos. 1, 2, and 3. The court decided to hold concurrent hearings of the above appeal cases. Since each of the offenses against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any longer.

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

Criminal facts

The summary of the judgment of the court below is the same as each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. In light of the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes, the method, frequency, period, etc. of the instant crime for sentencing is not good. The Defendant again commits the instant crime during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime, and most of the damages have not been recovered and have not been agreed with the victims, etc. are disadvantageous circumstances.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant has led to a confession of all the facts constituting the crime and reflects the depth, some damaged articles were returned during the arrest process, and the amount of damage is not considerably significant, and the age and amount of the defendant's age.