The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The decision of the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant ex officio, stolen articles means articles acquired through a property crime itself (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do353, Apr. 16, 2004). Article 333 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the stolen articles shall be returned to the victim as the judgment where the reason for return to the victim is apparent. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, one male wall attachment (No. 1826, Apr. 1, 2013, Sung-nam District Prosecutors' Office, 2013, No. 1826, No. 17, Jan. 17, 201), two U.S. dollarss (No. 18, Nov. 29, 2004), two new articles seized (No. 19, Nov. 21, 201), one new articles seized (No. 20, Nov. 21, 2012).

Therefore, since the seized article of this case is stolen and it cannot be deemed that the reason to return it to the victim is clear, the judgment of the court below ordering the victim to return it to the victim's name mispersible person, or by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the requirements for return, which affected