The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Seized evidence shall be confiscated as provided for in subparagraphs 74 through 76.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below (two years of imprisonment and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the prosecutor examined the facts charged against the Defendant at the trial of the case, and “The Defendant came in front of AB apartment No. 103 and No. 401, 105, August 12, 2015, between 19:59 to 20:45, the Defendant reported the network along with D, and “E” went into a window with a window where the Defendant was a victim AC owner, and “E” went into a window where the Defendant was the victim AC owner.

As a result, the Defendant applied for amendments to a bill of amendment to the contents that add “A person’s property was stolen habitually in combination with D and E,” and this Court permitted the same, thereby changing the subject of the judgment.

As such, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

3. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument about sentencing, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts and evidence acknowledged by the court and the summary of the facts and evidence are as follows. The last paragraph of the judgment of the court below in the "criminal facts" in the last paragraph of the "criminal facts" is as follows: (a) the defendant came to 103 Dong 401 of the AB apartment 103 Dong 401 of Osan City between August 12, 2015 and 20:45, and (b) the defendant reported the network along with D; and (c) E intruded with the victim AC's net gold-free stm, which is owned by the victim AC, with its windows going to scrod, one, a multimond one, a 1, a 14K gm, a white-rom, and a self-reed half-rom.

Accordingly, the Defendant added criminal facts to the Defendant that habitually stolen another’s property in collaboration with D and E, and the Defendant’s “a summary of evidence” column “the Defendant’s original trial statement” and “a summary of evidence.”