The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

A unit (Evidence No. 1) of seized lives (Evidence No. 1) and a unit 1,00,00 square meters.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment) by the lower court (e., three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by authority, the prosecutor applied for changes in the name of the crime from "violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" to "Habitual thief", "Article 5-4 (1) and Article 329 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" to "Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act", and since this court permitted this and changed the subject of the judgment, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground of the above ex officio reversal, and the judgment below is again decided as follows.

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 Articles of the Criminal Act and Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense (or, collectively, the choice of imprisonment);

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

1. For the reason of sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act, the defendant stolen goods after he was left away from the glass of the vehicle. In light of the fact that the method of sentencing is inferior, that the defendant committed a crime repeatedly over several times during a short period of time, that there was a record of having been sentenced to punishment twice as a crime of the same kind, that the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime, and that the defendant did not take any particular measures to recover from damage, it is inevitable to sentence the defendant.

However, the defendant has led to the crime of this case and is against his/her gender, and he/she has given a certain residence.