The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

one plastic sheet (Evidence No. 1), seized,

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the progress records of the case.

A. On July 4, 2013, the Defendant and the applicant for a retrial (hereinafter “Defendant”) were sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny) by the Seoul Southern District Court.

B. The Defendant appealed against the above judgment. On September 27, 2013, this Court reversed the lower judgment and sentenced the Defendant to a three-year imprisonment (Seoul High Court Decision 2013No2364, hereinafter “Seoul High Court Decision on Review”). On November 15, 2013, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

C. On May 26, 2016, upon the Defendant’s request for a retrial, this Court rendered a decision to commence a retrial on May 26, 2016, and the said decision to commence a retrial became final and conclusive as is, as there was no legitimate

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant (unfair punishment) is too unreasonable as to the punishment imposed by the court below (four years of imprisonment).

3. Upon ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal following the amendment of a bill of indictment, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of a bill of indictment to the effect that the name of the defendant is "Habitual larceny" from "violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" and "Article 5-4 (6) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" and "Articles 329 and 330 of the Criminal Act" are changed to "Articles 329, 330, 332, and 342 of the Criminal Act" in the trial of the court, and the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any longer

4. If so, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

[Discied Reasons for the Judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court.