All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below (No. 1 year and 8 months, and No. 2 months: Imprisonment with prison labor) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal, the court of first instance decided to hold a joint hearing of each appeal case against the defendant by examining the judgment below. The judgment of the court below is in the relation of concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the judgment of the court below should simultaneously render a judgment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act and sentence a single punishment within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

3. If so, the court below's decision is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and it is again decided after pleading as follows.

【Grounds for another judgment】 The facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence recognized by the court and summary of the facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence are as stated in each of the corresponding columns of each judgment below, thereby citing them in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Selection of each of the following imprisonment, with the exception of relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 332, 329, 330, and 342 (Habitual larceny) of the Criminal Act, Article 360 (1) of the Criminal Act (the embezzlement of deserted articles in possession), Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (the fraud point), and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (the fraud point), and larceny of habitual residence at night;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. It is recognized that the sum of the value of the stolen goods of this case or the amount of fraud for the reason of sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act that aggravated concurrent crimes is not relatively large, and that the stolen goods are food, etc.

However, the defendant has a record of being punished 11 times as embezzlement of larceny and possession of the same law, and among them, is punished as imprisonment.