All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and by imprisonment with prison labor for a period of ten months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) The Defendant committed each of the instant crimes under the condition of mental illness or mental and physical disability with mental illness. 2) Each of the judgment below on unfair sentencing (Article 1: imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year and six months, and the second judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for a period of six months) is too unreasonable and unfair.

B. Defendant B’s imprisonment (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation, and confiscation) imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the Defendants’ grounds for appeal prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

A. Defendant A reviewed each appeal case against the judgment of the court below in the first and second instances, and each of the offenses as stated in the judgment of the court below is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, the sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, each of the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, despite the existence of the above reasons for reversal of authority, the above defendant's mental and physical disorder still is subject to the judgment of this court, so the following three paragraphs are examined.

B. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court, the above Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny and two years of suspension of execution on September 4, 2014 by the Incheon District Court on September 12, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 12, 2014. Since each offense in the holding of the first instance court is in the concurrent relationship between the above special larceny and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the sentence shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity and the case where the judgment is rendered simultaneously in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Since the application of the first instance court’s law was omitted in the process of concurrent crimes, the first instance court’s judgment against the above Defendant cannot be maintained, as the statutory penalty for each special larceny in the holding of the first instance court was omitted.