The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal is too unfased and unreasonable.

2. In full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant was sentenced twice to imprisonment for the same kind of crime; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime during the repeated crime period; (c) the Defendant did not recover from damage; and (d) the Defendant’s age, occupation, and all other matters concerning the sentencing specified in the records and arguments, the Prosecutor’s assertion is reasonable, since the sentence of the lower judgment is deemed unreasonable.

3. Accordingly, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following judgment is rendered through pleading

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding columns 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 legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act ( point of embezzlement), Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 70(1)3 of the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act (hereafter referred to as "use of stolen credit cards"), and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

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