The number of seized drones 2 (Evidence 1) and 1 even (Evidence 3) shall be confiscated, respectively.

1. Intrusion upon residence;

A. At around 02:00 on October 23, 2009, the Defendant came to a multi-household house located in the Nowon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Nowon Noise and Vibration (number 1 omitted), and entered the front of the house entrance of Nonindicted 3, the victim Nonindicted 5, who became aware of the fact that the entrance door was locked, opened the window and the head was pushed away from the windows, and reported this fact to the police, and escaped at that place.

Accordingly, the Defendant invadedd the victim Nonindicted 3’s residence.

B. On October 23, 2009, at around 02:25, the Defendant went to the front of the toilet door in front of the victim non-indicted 4, who was on the second floor of the old vibration (number 2 omitted) located in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (number 2 omitted).

Accordingly, the Defendant invadedd the victim Nonindicted 4’s residence.

2. Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims thereof (special robbery, rape, etc.);

On October 23, 2009, at around 02:45, the Defendant intruded into the house entrance of Nonindicted 2 of the victim Nonindicted 1 (the victim Nonindicted 2) who was using the computer at the location of the housing located in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Nowon-gu (number 3 omitted), and threatened the victim Nonindicted 1 (the victim Nonindicted 1 (the victim 26 years of age, the female), who was using the computer, with his hand, with the victim Nonindicted 1’s hand, and with the victim Nonindicted 1’s rab, who was in possession, with the victim Nonindicted 1’s rab, the Defendant threatened the victim Nonindicted 1, who was in possession, with the victim Nonindicted 1.

As such, the Defendant: (a) threatened the victim Nonindicted 1 by threatening the victim Nonindicted 1 to suppress the victim Nonindicted 1’s resistance; (b) putting the victim Nonindicted 1 into the room room; (c) laid off the victim Nonindicted 1’s ste and panty; and inserted the victim Nonindicted 1’s sexual flag into the sexual flag of Nonindicted 1; (d) putting one handbag on the victim Nonindicted 2’s handbag, with the victim Nonindicted 2’s handbag, one resident registration certificate, one credit card four, and two physical cards, and putting the victim Nonindicted 1 into the victim Nonindicted 1’s sexual flag on the entrance; and (e) putting the victim Nonindicted 1’s sexual flag on the front of the entrance; and (e) putting the victim Nonindicted 1 Nonindicted 1 into the room and the victim’s sexual flag into the victim Nonindicted 1’s sexual flag.

Accordingly, the Defendant infringed upon another person’s residence at night, forcibly taken property, and raped the victim Nonindicted Party 1.

1. Each statement made by the police on Nonindicted 1, 2, 3, and 4

1. Each entry into the police seizure record and the list of seizure;

1. Each description of the drilling and drilling (the results of electronic analysis and appraisal);

1. Each image of each damaged field photograph;

1. Previous records: References to criminal records, investigation reports (Attachment to the same criminal records), and investigation reports (Confirmation of the date of release of a suspect);

Article 5(2) of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims Thereof, Articles 334(1), 333, 297 (Special Robbery and Rape) of the Criminal Act, Article 319(1) of each Criminal Act (the occupation of intrusion upon residence, choice of imprisonment)

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Specific violent Crimes, the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act (Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Violation of the Act on the Protection, etc. of Victims) and Article 35 of the Criminal Act (Special Cases concerning Intrusion upon Residence)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

The former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, Article 50, and the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act [Aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes, Violation of the Act on the Protection of Victims, etc. (Special Robbery, Rape, etc.)]

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Articles 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act)

1. Confiscation;

Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act

However, as above, the reason why the defendant did not deviate from the place where the crime was committed is deemed to be due to the fact that the defendant maintained a tension at the time when the crime was committed, and that he was temporarily tension with the tension after success, and that the victim non-indicted 1 made a statement at the investigative agency that the defendant was snicking, but the defendant's speech or behavior was normal as if the defendant did not drink at all, and in light of the circumstances, means, and the defendant's behavior before and after the crime committed in this case, the above argument by the defendant and the defense counsel cannot be accepted, since it does not seem that the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime, and the above argument by the defendant and the defense counsel cannot be accepted.

The crime of the crime in the judgment of the court is a special robbery provided for in Article 5 (2) of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof. Thus, since the crime of the crime in the judgment of the court is a special robbery provided for in Article 5 (2) of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof, the aggravated area (nine to thirteen years of imprisonment) is selected and the repeated crime under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Specific Crimes falls under the repeated crime in the above aggravated area, if the upper and lower limit

On the other hand, the sentencing guidelines are not set for each crime of intrusion upon residence in the judgment that is concurrent crimes of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims (special robbery, Rape, etc.) which are basic crimes. As the sentencing guidelines is not set, the scope of recommended punishment in the sentencing guidelines for this case is not less than 13 years and not more than

In view of the fact that the Defendant was sentenced to punishment for committing the crime of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims (Special Robbery, Rape, etc.) and committed each of the instant crimes at the same time after the completion of the execution of the sentence and again during the period of repeated crime, and that the Defendant, upon intrusion upon home at night, threatened the victim Nonindicted 1 by threateningd with the victim Nonindicted 1, thereby forcibly taking advantage of money and valuables, the nature of the instant crime is not very good, and that the fear of causing the victim Nonindicted 1 by the instant crime would be considerable and mental shock, and that the Defendant did not take any measures to recover the damage up to now, and the victim Nonindicted 1 wanted the Defendant’s severe punishment, it is inevitable to pronounce a sentence heavier to the Defendant.

However, the defendant's mistake is against his own will, the defendant seems to have committed the crime of this case in a somewhat excessive state while attending the prison and faithfully living in the workplace after being released from the prison, and the crime of robbery and rape of this case was committed once, and the defendant was immediately arrested at the place of crime, and the damaged articles were returned to non-indicted 2 of the victim, and other various sentencing conditions recorded in the records, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, etc., shall be determined by the sentence of this case beyond the lowest limit of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines and the sentence as ordered.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Kim Jong-Un (Presiding Judge)