The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. However, the Defendant did not perform the improvement of character and conduct in seven times of punishment due to the same crime, and committed the crime of several similar methods during the period of repeated crime.

However, in light of favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized the crime, which appears to repent, that the instant damage was inflicted on one cell phone, and the victim was returned to the victim and the victim was not punished, that the relationship between family members who are likely to suppress the recidivism is maintained, and other favorable conditions of sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is somewhat heavy, and thus, the above argument by the Defendant is reasonable.

3. Since the defendant's appeal is with merit, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is ruled again after pleading.

【The reasons for the judgment in multiple cases】 The facts constituting a crime recognized by the court in light of the summary of the facts constituting a crime and the evidence and the summary of the evidence are the same as the entries in each corresponding column of the judgment below, thereby citing them as they are in accordance with

Application of Statutes

1. Article 5-4(5)1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes related to the crime and Article 329 of the Criminal Act [Article 5-4(5)1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes is reasonable to view the special provisions of Article 35(2) of the Criminal Act in accordance with the proviso to Article 8 of the Criminal Act in light of the newly established phrase of aggravated punishment, the prevention of double evaluation, and the necessity of interpretation consistent with the Constitution. Thus, the aggravation of repeated crimes under Article 35(2) of

1. Determination of the grounds for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act on discretionary mitigation of punishment shall be based on the same reasons as indicated in the judgment on the allegation of unfair sentencing on the grounds of sentencing.