The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Sub-paragraphs 2, 4, 6, and 6, of seized evidence.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant ex officio, the stolen goods seized and the reason for return to the victim is clear should be returned to the victim by judgment (Article 33(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). According to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, the evidence No. 2, which was seized, was not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the date, time, place, and place indicated in No. 23 per annum No. 24 per annum No. 25 per annum per annum, and evidence No. 6, place, and place mentioned in No. 26, No. 7, No. 29 per annum, and evidence No. 27, No. 31, No. 329 per annum per annum, and the date and place stated in No. 29 per annum No. 29 per annum, and the date and time stated in No. 29 per annum No. 329 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and each victim’s name was not returned to the victim.

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, on the grounds of ex officio reversal as seen above, and the following is again decided after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting an offense and the summary of the evidence acknowledged by this court is as follows: (a) the facts constituting an offense of the lower court’s judgment stated in Paragraph (3) 1 as “ August 26, 2015”; and (b) the summary of the evidence as stated in the judgment below is as follows: (c) adding “a report on investigation (the attachment of stolen and fraudulent power judgment)” to the criminal records stated in the judgment; and (d) adding “a report on investigation (the attachment of