The judgment of the first instance is reversed.

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

One cell phone (No. 1), which has been seized.

1. The punishment (one year and four months imprisonment and the return of victims) of the first instance court on the gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable;

2. The judgment of the court of first instance can no longer be maintained, since the ex officio judgment prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment of habitual larceny as stated below, and since this court permitted changes in the indictment of habitual larceny, the judgment of the court of first instance cannot be maintained.

3. In conclusion, the first instance judgment is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground that the grounds for reversal ex officio exist, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting an offense recognized by this court and the evidence related thereto are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following changes. Thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The criminal facts column [2015 Highest 1173] criminal facts clause 1 changed as follows. The habitual larceny defendant stolens the victims' articles three times habitually as follows. A.

At around 22:00 on February 7, 2015, the Defendant stolen the victim’s property by using the gap in “M” in Seoul L 1’s dys where the victim N is stroke at the dys of “M” store, and by using cash 50,000 won, which is the victim’s ownership on his table, credit cards, resident registration certificates, etc., one unscokeed part of the market price where the victim was located.

B. At around 23:40 on February 17, 2015, the Defendant: (a) discovered the victim D within the subway line 1 subway line, which operated a subway line in the middle-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government adjacent to Seoul Station; (b) cut off the Plaintiff’s resident registration certificate owned by the victim in other victim’s inner part of the front part of the front part of the front part of the other victim’s cell line; and (c) cut off the Defendant’s cell phone of the amount equivalent to KRW 110,000 at the market price, including the national bank’s physical card.

(c).