The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

Seized evidence subparagraph 1 shall be forfeited from the accused.

Article 5-4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which is a applicable provision of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, for the instant crime, is excessively unreasonable to the extent that the statutory penalty is contrary to the equality, and thus, is in violation

The sentence of unfair sentencing (five years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. On the criminal facts in the judgment of the court below, the prosecutor ex officio made an application for changes in indictment with regard to criminal facts as stated in the judgment of the court below, and the application for changes in the name of the crime as "Habitual larceny" and the applicable provisions of law were changed to "Articles 32 and 330 of the Criminal Act", and

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the legal principles of the defendant and the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by this court shall be as shown in the respective columns of the judgment below.

Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act is quoted as it is.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 332, 330, and 329 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the selection of comprehensive imprisonment;

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

1. Sentencing of Article 48(1) of the Confiscation Criminal Act is a favorable circumstance that the defendant reflects his fault, and that the family members of the defendant appeal against the prior action.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant by intrusion upon another person’s residence, and thus, was highly dangerous, and the Defendant was released from Busan District Court on May 13, 2010 after having been sentenced to four years of imprisonment with prison labor for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the thief). After being released from the prison, the Defendant did not know about the repeated crime even though he was during the repeated crime, and returned to the country by using the knife racing.