The judgment below

Part concerning the crime No. 1 and No. 2-A of the judgment shall be reversed.

No. 1 of the above judgment, and No. 2-2 of the above judgment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles). The court below sentenced a suspended sentence of imprisonment for part of each of the crimes of this case, and omitted the suspended sentence period. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The main sentence of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, which states that "in the event that a sentence of imprisonment, with or without prison labor, for not more than three years is to be imposed, and there are extenuating circumstances in light of the provisions of Article 51, the execution of the sentence may be suspended for a period of not less than one year nor more than five years;

The court below held that each of the crimes of this case was a crime No. 1 and No. 2-1 of the judgment of the court below, and the crime of this case was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment and omitted facts without specifying the suspended sentence period are clearly recorded. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is justified.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below on this part is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is again decided after pleading, on the grounds that the prosecutor's appeal on the crime No. 1 and No. 2-A of the judgment of the court below is justified.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Articles 356, 355 (1) (the point of occupational embezzlement and the choice of imprisonment) of the Criminal Act, and Article 330 of the Criminal Act (the point of nighttime intrusion larceny);

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the Defendant is making a confession of each of the instant crimes, and the benefit acquired therefrom is not so much.

In addition, each of the crimes of this case is around February 2018.