특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Although the crime of intrusion on each building of this case by the misapprehension of the legal principles is incorporated into only one crime of thief in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby finding the Defendant guilty of each of the crimes of intrusion on the building of this case.
B. The lower court’s imprisonment (three years of imprisonment) on the ground of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.
2. The lower court, based on the misapprehension of the legal doctrine, found the Defendant guilty of having committed a crime of intrusion on a structure by regarding the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) and the intrusion on a structure as separate crime
However, in a case where a person who committed a crime, such as habitual larceny, under Article 5-4 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, has invaded upon his/her residence as a means of the crime, only one of the crimes, such as habitual larceny, is established and separate from the crime of habitual larceny, as prescribed in the above Article. In addition to the crime, the crime of habitual larceny, etc., committed the crime of habitual larceny, and the crime of habitual larceny, etc., which committed the above habitual larceny, does not constitute an intrusion upon his/her residence, unless the crime of habitual larceny, but does not reach the crime of habitual larceny, and even in a case where the crime of habitual larceny was committed, it seems that it was the actual occurrence of habitual larceny, etc., the act of intrusion upon residence constitutes only one crime of habitual larceny, etc. as prescribed in the above Article, and does not constitute the crime of habitual larceny, separately from the crime of habitual larceny, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 84Do1573, Dec. 26, 1987).