The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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

1. The sentence of the court below (two years and six months of imprisonment) against the defendant in the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal of ex officio, the prosecutor applied for changes in the contents of “violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes,” which are the name of the defendant, as “Habitual larceny,” and “Article 5-4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes,” and “Article 329 of the Criminal Act,” respectively, to “Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act,” and the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any longer

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

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense (or, collectively, the choice of imprisonment);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The consideration of favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing as seen below)

1. Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. of Social Service Orders;

1. Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the Return of Victims;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 333(2) and (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the issuance of victims of the instant crime is that the amount of damage exceeds KRW 100 million, and the instant crime has been committed repeatedly and habitually for a long time by using a special veterinary method, and that the nature of the crime is not good.

On the other hand, the defendant is the first offender and reflects the mistake in depth, and the family members of the defendant are also leading.